We can't use systemd because we "have" to use only one init system and that would force us to drop Hurd/BSD. And we can't just drop a platform no one actually uses productively, because we don't drop stuff. So, let's just drop GNOME. And then maybe, who knows, we'll also drop KDE (if they happen to be stupid enough to move towards systemd/logind/etc.).
Am I the only one not being able to see the logic in there?
They call themselves "Universal Operating System" but fail to acknowledge that there will never be one unique and perfect solution to unify BSD, Hurd and Linux and
get the best system – right now for Linux that would be systemd but that actually doesn't matter at all – from a technical point of view
If you're a package maintainer for Debian – remember, universal
– and you need your package to run on more architectures than Linux, you will most likely understand that you have to provide multiple means of getting that daemon started in different init systems. Not to mention if you're even developing
software for Linux and
BSD you already know pain.
These systems differ fundamentally, why try to unify them by dictating an inferior solution, just to have the same init system across platforms?
Oh, and yes, the "same init system" isn't even right at all, because, you know, systemd requires Linux, but so does upstart (maybe there will be a fully working port sometime in the future is not
an argument). So much fail here.+Josselin Mouette
What will you do if they really decide to drop GNOME?