Linus actually makes perfect sense on the question.

"Doing things better" doesn't always mean "doing things right" or "doing things correctly".

Systemd does things in a better way than traditional ways, but that doesn't necessarily make them the best options, the best choices, or the right ones. Just as systemd does init better, so does OpenRC, Runit, s6, etc. but systemd is the new kid on the block with all the cool toys. But, if you noticed, Linus doesn't fully embrace systemd or it's creators. To him, systemd as init is a means to an end, but read that line, "init". That doesn't mean he likes logind, networkd, and he certainly doesn't care for journald, and udevd is always an apparent child from a parent that needs constant supervision and a belt beating every now and then, and kdbus is about as tolerated as using a chainsaw to perform open heart surgery.

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Laurent Bercot<mailto:ska-devel@skarnet.org>
Sent: ‎7/‎1/‎2015 1:01 PM
To: dng@???<mailto:dng@lists.dyne.org>
Subject: Re: [DNG] Linus answers a question about systemd

On 01/07/2015 21:17, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Linus describes personality issues around how to handle bug reports.
>
> And I think that is one of the main issues I have with some systemd upstream
> developers as well. The "we are right, you are wrong", "we wont fix this its
> not our bug", "we created a regression, but its still correct what we do, go
> away" kind of attitudes I have seen in bug reports and mailing list posts.

Oh, yes, the systemd creators (Poettering and Sievers, essentially) have a
very inexperienced and irresponsible attitude when it comes to maintaining
software. The person to be blamed here is their manager at Red Hat, who
entrusts major software design, and a job, to those people.

--
Laurent

_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@???
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng