Re: thowing out the baby with the bathwater
"Why not solve this in the traditional Linux/FOSS way? Meaning: you want a better alternative for component XYZ, because you believe XYZ is broken? Then you write one. Or you fix the existing broken one. Forking because you don't like the init subsystem or its replacement systemd is quite the unnecessary leap. I don't know if it will really lead anywhere."
Firstly, fixing the existing broken one, if the existing maintainers are unwilling to do it themselves, is accomplished by forking. It's the traditional Linus/FOSS way.
Well, it's not just one component, it's a whole inter-related heap of them. In fact, apart from the kernal & libc, it's the core of the OS. So just replacing a single component won't cut it. The term fork is reasonably well merited although you could also call it a respin or a derivative.
Of course the twist in the tail here is that in fact the underlying rationale is that the original wasn't broken but it's being fixed anyway. Conventional wisdom has something to say about that,
Biting the hand that feeds IT
