No the intent is not to infest GNU/Linux with bugs.
RedHat's aims have not changed from when they first introduced SystemD
and they are achieving them on target which is why IBM bought in.

It is to become the only Distro regardless of name, in effect
the SystemD Operating System. Canonical had been angling for
the same thing for years with its "one interface for all devices"
with their push for total GUI control.

By forcing the same packages and package versions by tight integration
with SystemD (Apache2, BIND9, dhcpcd5, etc. etc.) then all Linux Distros
will fall into the scope of RedHat Support business model and make
everyone potential clients regardless of who the packager was.

I thought all this was public knowledge....


If developers continue to contribute to their packages after they
are absorbed by SystemD (instead of forking as Mysql/Mariadb
OpenOffice\LibreOffice did) then Redhat will win and GNU/Linux will
no longer be.

So Devs, this is one good reason NOT to submit patches to Debian.
Unfortunately, all the other Devs in the world not here either don't
care, or have a vested interest in (work for) IBM\Redhat.

>
> The facts with systemd is this. RedHat's business model is to sell
> support for their OS. Only problem is that Linux is pretty stable on
> it's own. No problems means no support money. That's why they must
> replace a perfectly good init system that's worked perfectly for
> multiple decades with something that's got over 1000 bugs in the
> tracker alone and handles thing like dns resolution. This isn't even
> about features. If it was they'd be using something like OpenRC which
> does pretty much all the same process management systemd does without
> all the RCEs and scope creep.
>
>