They're referring to jobs where you have overarching goals and deliverables but aren't logging actions to the event, or to the hour.
I've had jobs like yours and steady, dependable, maintainable pace is the way to get through the week. Don't over promise, don't look available for random new tasks.
At my current gig I have tasks issued at the 2 week level, and aside from very rare requests for assistance or discussion, I'm left to my to-do list, and my predetermined commitments. If I consistently meet my commitments, and show up for scheduled meetings, no one gives a shit when I actually work. It's great but requires the right environment.
People who could be easily replaced. It's a non issue.
I do work on software teams, and don't conduct myself like Linus, because I'm not Linus. That pattern of communication isn't available to me, an average engineer.
But if someone spoke to me that way (and they have) I took it as a clear signal I need to level up and act right. Not an invitation to feel bad about myself.
Linux has clearly not missed out on wide adoption in any way.
No, was the product reduced or damaged, not did people leave. No one cares about individuals, if they can be replaced without blocking the progress of the project.
Those articles are very whiney. They chose to work on that project, with a singular leader. It's his house, his rules, his standards.
If there's a surplus of talent (sounds like Mauro was dead weight) then at most he was just rude on Mauro's way out the door.
I'm not saying it's cool to be rude, but if it's Linus' review then you get what you get. To be butthurt about someone being rude to you should motivate you to learn your code interactions better. (In this case error handling)