> > Looks to me like he isn't arguing for systemd, but he is just discussing
> > systems designs and implementation. Also looks to me like he is simply
> > keeping an open mind, and not getting swept away in hate either way....
>
> ...while I am getting swept away in hate? :) I admit I like very much
> your point about some of the systemd-nonsense tolls being potentially
> useful and interesting.
>

ufff, seriously? Nobody is getting "swept away with hate", what I meant was
that the rhetoric against systemd gets cranked up so high at times that it
feels not possible to have a normal, levelheaded, unemotional discussion. I
enjoy reading TJ's dispatches - he clearly is a seasoned, experienced
professional, and his perspectives are worth considering.



> What I don't like is that fact that these interesting bits are just
> part of a monolithic, messy, obscure, hard-to-maintain and hard-to-use
> spaghetti-implementation that openly targets at managing the whole
> system. And (call me paranoid) I don't like the fact that the
> development of the systemd-nonsense is effectively led by RedHat, who
> has a lot of interest in having "one ring to rule them all", and is
> managed by people who answer "troll" and "wontfix" to questions and
> bug reports, in line with the worst commercial-Unix policies of the
> late eighties. We have been freed once from such nonsense, so why
> should we come back?
>

Yeah, we are all contributing in Devuan in some form or another because we
don't like systemd for whatever reason.



> IMHO, there is no wonderful bag of technical novelties which can
> justify a flawed design, incarnated in a flawed implementation,
> pursued for flawed aims by a bunch of people who effectively act and
> behave like they have the right answer for everithing, while the rest
> is just garbage. Call this "hate" if this let you feel any better :)
>

There is a debating technique called "The Steel Man" - it is very useful
and effective. If anything, this is what I see TJ doing more than anything
else.