With respect, I believe everyone is overthinking this. I don’t think anyone really cares about this, other than each distribution’s camp of fanboys/fangirls. If they didn’t want to use systemd, they wouldn’t. The reason that they do is because most believe that new technology is inherently better than what they consider old. Linux communities are strange in that respect. Mr. Poettering’s arguments for systemd are essentially much the same.

No one really has an agenda, and if someone actually did, Linux is GPL and not even RedHat can prevent a fork of the kernel, even if Sievers and Poettering get kdbus into it.  

Personally, I’m more concerned about egos and wasted effort, than systemd.  Things like this have happened before and will certainly happen again.  I remember the XFree/Xorg incident quite well.

 



On 12/10/2014 03:29 PM, Joel Roth wrote:

I agree with your analysis and will go further

The comments are free advertising and he should be worried, it is just a matter of time before all the adopting distros have to offer an alternate route.  

Devuan put a fork init and Mr. Poettering knows systemd as a universal Linux OS commander is done (cooked).

After the final moves of Debian putting all the eggs in the systemd basket, many thought the controversy would go away.
I think the coverage that this anti-systemd movement is getting is actually causing it to gain momentum and starting to get into the geek-user area and one has to remember that it was that demographic that caused the widespread rejection of the dumbed down Gnome3.  
I think the realization that this is about a wide ranging corruption of an OS and not just an alternate init is starting to take hold.
    


Tom Collins wrote:


Lennart Poettering says Devuan is going nowhere and will fail
Decrys anonymity of developers: 33:00

If he bothers to mention it, it suggests to me that the
stakes are high for him, and that he (and the agenda he
represents) isn't satisfied with Red Hat and half-a-dozen
other distributions having adopted systemd.