Maybe I am over-thinking it, but I think not.
Perhaps it is merely a battle of hipsters vs. fanbois at each distro.

There really is an agenda, there has to be, although you may see it
marketed as a vision.
It does have the signs of being an ego thing with some parties.

There is a horrendous waste of effort on both sides that much is for sure.
I think this waste happened as soon a systemd became more than a new
init and started replacing and encapsulating perfectly good services and
limiting choice of approach.

My memories date back to the XFree/Xorg battle too, and I see rough
parallels when it comes to the level of polarity and projected
hostility, but the issue itself IMHO is vastly different.

systemd is grabbing the very roots of the OS and sneaking into
everything it possibly can from basic networking and device functioning
to desktop environment dependencies.

Some look upon it as a cancer, I look upon it as PulseAudio for the
entire OS.
Like PulseAudio there is nothing wrong with it if your needs match the
vision of the development team and IME it finally works well enough
these days for most installs.
With PulseAudio I can remove it and put in alternate audio applications
to better address the particular needs and the only screw up is the loss
of Skype (a big deal for some) which is currently bound to PA only.
I see the Poettering systemd vision as it spreads out from init as a
whole lot worse with its tied in services and lock-ins as app
development or at least available binaries become solely dependent on
systemd and its tree of services.

Forking the Kernel as a way to avoid this creeping Poetterama? I think
you forgot the winking smiley.

Clarke







On 12/10/2014 10:52 PM, t.j.duchene@??? wrote:
> 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.

>
>
>