|
|
|
|
|
by jle17
1331 days ago
|
|
The tight coupling, the non-portability, all of that are technical choices, that can be debated on their own merit without the need to attribute malevolent intentions to the developers. Projects merged changes because they wanted them, not because their goodwill was abused to make them merge anything. People got systemd on their OSes because they chose OSes whose developers chose to move to systemd. It's not like Lennart comes to your home with a gun if you install OpenBSD. |
|
The ramifications of those technical choices on the software ecosystem are so well understood [0], that there is no point in discussing "their own merits" in a vacuum.
What's most relevant to my professional and waning hobbyist interests are the shape and trajectory of the software ecosystem as a whole. To talk about systemd without talking about how it's developers interact with the software ecosystem is to talk about nothing.
[0] I graduated before systemd was a glint in Pottering's eye, but we somehow still covered it in school. Not only coupling vs cohesion in the abstract, but also how various design decisions (including init system arguments of old!) interacted with the ebb and flow of unix-like OS evolution.