No, for the love of god, no! First, let me be clear: I have my issues with systemd. The "exmbrace, extend, exterminate" fears from the article are justified to

No, for the love of god, no! First, let me be clear: I have my issues with systemd. The "exmbrace, extend, exterminate" fears from the article are justified to some degree. I don't like Poettering's personality (ok, this is only tangentially related). Why the fsck does it ship an NTP and DHCP client? Both of which had their share of security issues because inexperienced idiots needed to pretend to be rock star programmers reinventing the wheel for no good reason. Oh and I use neither Gnome nor KDE so I couldn't care less if they'd break when switching to another init system. BUT: Get your shit together and accept reality. Systemd is here to stay, and as the article mentions, supporting other init systems will become more and more of a chore. Combine this with quotes like > [...] the project had been unable to fully support systemd alternatives due to a lack of developer interest [...] > "We have already voted with apt: less than 1% of new installs use sysvinit" and then the fact that with Devuan WE ALREADY HAVE DEBIAN WITHOUT SYSTEMD. Why the fsck should we waste every Debian developer's/contributor's time with supplying brain damaged init scripts, patches and workarounds for 1% of the Debian user base. Hey I have an idea; let's cut back on QA and reassign those resources to ensuring Debian works with sysvinit. Does the Debian project have any staff working on security? Scrap that, let's have them work on supporting retarded init systems from the 90s instead!