Debian is currently conducting a vote on a General Resolution entitled Init systems and systemd. I had a few brief thoughts about the circumstances around this that I wanted to share.
I like systemd and I use it on all of my systems. That said, I have some concerns about it, in particular the way it's gradually eating up so much other systems software. The opportunity for alternatives to exist and get feedback from interested users seems important to me as a check and balance and to avoid a monoculture. Such an environment should even help to ensure systemd remains a compelling piece of software. The question that this GR poses is really whether Debian should be a place where alternatives can exist. In answering that question I am reminded of the mantra of Extinction Rebellion. I appreciate that is about a far more important topic, but it still seems pertinent: If not us, who? If not now, when?
What is Debian for, anyway? Once upon a time, from a certain perspective, it was all counter-cultural software. Should that change? Perhaps it already has. When I was more actively involved in the project, I watched some factions strive to compete with alternative distributions like Fedora. Fedora achieves a great deal, partly by having a narrow and well-defined focus. With the best will in the world, Debian can't compete at that game. And why should it? If Fedora is what you want, then Fedora is right there, go use it!
In the UK we are also about to vote in a General Election. As happens often in FPTP voting systems, the parties are largely polarized around a single issue, although one side of that issue is more factionalised than the other. And that side stands to lose out, as the vote is diluted. This Debian GR is in a similar situation, although not as bad since Debian doesn't use FPTP. But I could understand fellow developers, not as deeply invested in the issue as those who have proposed options, getting fatigued trying to evaluate them. For pro-systemd/anti-alternative folks, the choice is easy: First-choice the one (or two) positions that express that, and rank the majority under "further discussion". For those at the other pole, this strategy is risky: those folks want their transferable vote to move to the most popular option, and so must not succumb to voter fatigue.
Whatever your position, if you hold the power to vote, please take time to evaluate the options and use it.