On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 04:52:44PM +0000, Noel Torres wrote:

[cut]

>
> Because it is so intrincately depended on by the core of a Debian
> system that we can not simply "get Debian and remove the systemd
> bits". We owe our users a truly systemd-free system, and that's why
> we are here, but we do not owe them a systemd-forbidding system.
>
> We are building a distribution, and as such we make decisions and
> set defaults. But the user is in the wheel, not us. There is where
> Debian failed us.
>
> Do I want systemd in my boxes? For sure not, but I still want to be
> free to choose "yes" inside Devuan, exactly the same I'm free to
> shout some political views on the street. It's a matter of freedom,
> not a matter of forbidding. Devuan gives me the choice, and I will
> chose "No systemd, thanks".
>
> As a resume: If you want a systemd-free system, Devuan is your
> distribution, and will always be. But if you want a system designed
> to be unable to run systemd, please leave us. This is not the place
> for such an anti-freedom POV.
>

I totally agree with the spirit of your post, but you would reckon
that such a variety (in terms of init choices, for instance) is bound
to the availability of a sizable cohort of developers.

The problem of systemd IMHO is that of introducing in GNU/Linux an
*indispensable* piece of software which is hard to remove and replace,
and this is something that I am sure most of the community, including
the systemd-fanboys, will regret to have done, sooner or later. That's
why I believe it is fundamental to have a systemd-free distro, in
order to confirm that nothing is *indispensable* in a unix
environment...

My2Cents

KatolaZ

--
[ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ --- GLUG Catania -- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ me [at] katolaz.homeunix.net -- http://katolaz.homeunix.net -- ]
[ GNU/Linux User:#325780/ICQ UIN: #258332181/GPG key ID 0B5F062F ]
[ Fingerprint: 8E59 D6AA 445E FDB4 A153 3D5A 5F20 B3AE 0B5F 062F ]