That process is "starting" for 30 something years that free/open source software exists. That's eternity in IT.
If you remember, 30 years ago there was time when people were willing to pay for the software. There were lots of vendors, some of them very useful. Today, most people expect the software to be free. Some even get upset when someone ask them to pay for software. The trend is likely to continue.
If I compare LLVM (or even GCC) to any of the proprietary (and expensive) compilers I had to deal with in the past, jeeze, give me LLVM any day! Most of that proprietary stuff was utter crap compared to LLVM or GCC. In fact, recommendation to install/compile GCC and GNU tools was usually the first thing anyone who had to deal with commercial Unix saw, because the vendor-supplied compilers were buggy and supported only obsolete C/C++ versions.
IMHO, GCC which existed 20 years ago was perfectly fine. Moreover, Microsoft VC++ for Windows was fine too. I also remember Borland C. They all worked about the same.
Today, I use what comes with the platform. It's GCC on Linux (and GCC-based on most embedded things), VC++ on Windows, LLVM on Mac. I cannot tell the difference.
People who develop LLVM do so because they like it. They like how any language can be compiled in, optimized within the same framework, then the assembler produced for any CPU. May be it is fascinating to the LLVM developers, but it doesn't looks particularly fascinating to me, and I do not see any benefits for myself.
Free software made some things into commodities. But that doesn't mean the paid-for tools ceased to exist. E.g. Microsoft still sells their compiler and tools. Only the Community edition of Visual Studio is free, which has severe licensing restrictions. If you have more than 5 users or make more than $100k annually you have to buy the commercial version.
They cell their C# tools. I don't know if there are any open source substitutes.
Their C/C++ compiler is free download which comes with Platform SDK and doesn't even require opt-in for spying. 20 years ago I had to pay for it.
Riiight ... GCC alone is more than 30 years old. And we still have proprietary compilers (e.g. IAR) and some vendors even repackage and sell GCC-based toolchains (Microchip). Heck, some people prefer to use the expensive IAR compilers even where free GCC-based tools exist. Could it be that GCC simply doesn't (and cannot) cover all the market needs?
For a while. But not forever. We're now in money printing era. When it turns towards austerity there will be huge pull towards money savings and everything free.
Right now, Altium is considered better choice than KiCAD, but I wouldn't bet that it stays this way forever.
I am certainly not worried about lack of work, if anything, there will be more of it in the future because everything is moving from hardware to software due to lower costs of changes and faster time to market.
Of course there always be custom work for programmers ... or for programming AI robots