[Arm-netbook] Init Freedom

[James L]

> their stated mission statement is "to give people free choice over > their init service".  and... err... the lack of support for systemd >
makes that mission statement a false statement.

I wondered about this, so I am going to try a comprehensive
analysis of their website (irrelevant analysis is cut)

Main page mentions the "Exodus declaration in 2014"

The original declaration says "produce a reliable and minimalist base
distribution that stays away from the... lock-in promoted by systemd."
The original goal was to prevent lock-in, huh?

Also: "Among the priorities are: enable diversity... for the existing
Debian downstream *willing to preserve Init Freedom*."

That implies systemd is not part of "Init Freedom," since, according to
that, if downstream stayed with Debian (and systemd) they would not
be preserving Init Freedom

The main page mentions "the right to Init Freedom" and has a link...

"Init Freedom is about restoring a sane approach to PID1, **one that
respects diversity and freedom of choice**." The rest of the page is
irrelevant.

I wish they would define "Init freedom." The closest thing to a
definition is the last quote (above)

So it seems that systemd is explicitly excluded from Init Freedom (which
is *defined* as respecting freedom of choice) and therefore I cannot
disagree with your statement


> if they were true to their mission statement they would add the > option to include it.

Unfortunately, I have to agree

Here is a question: Is a false (in any way) mission statement enough to
totally dismiss something? Even if their actions (providing a reasonable
alternative) are seemingly good?

>From what I have observed, you seem to have two "codes" that you live
by, your ethics and your intuition. Your ethics seems to mostly involve
your influence over others, so what does your intuition say about Devuan?