Assuming Piotr means "sysvinit" when he says "init", I agree 100%.
Unless you're a Debian Dev, Lennart Poettering, or a Red Hat
stockholder, there's no rush to move away from sysvinit, which has been
serving us very well for what, three decades?



On Tue, 3 May 2016 08:41:37 +0200
poitr pogo <lepoitr@???> wrote:

> I vote for init to be default for at least few years.
> Devuan might consider switching to something else few years after
> wheezy lts will be dead.
>
> Meantime, all other init systems should be optional in Devuan.
>
> --
> Regards
> Piotr
>
> On 5/3/16, Steve Litt <slitt@???> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 May 2016 21:05:18 -0400
> > Hendrik Boom <hendrik@???> wrote:
> >
> >> Is there a summary of some sort explaining the various init
> >> systems, how they're put together, how they work, and especially
> >> the salient points on which they differ?
> >
> > I've tried. See
> > http://troubleshooters.com/linux/init/features_and_benefits.htm#init_system_feature_matrix
> >
> > Keep in mind these two things:
> >

> > 1) I'm an order of magnitude less knowledeable on init systems than
> > the average person on the supervision@??? mailing list.
> >    Those guys found several mistakes in my matrix, and I'm not sure
> > I corrected all of them.

> >
> > 2) Like everyone else, I have likes, dislikes and maybe an agenda.
> > I'm a huge fan of daemontools-inspired inits, and I have a
> > significant dislike of systemd.
> >
> > SteveT
> >
> > Steve Litt
> > April 2016 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century
> > http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dng mailing list
> > Dng@???
> > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
> >