> Right, so the problem isn't "choice" it's you being lazy.

I never said the problem was choice, and no, it's not just me being lazy. Be reasonable and debate in good faith, please.

The problem is having an ecosystem 'infected' with something that none, or at least most of the users do not want.

> Alpine HAS the opportunity to make a choice and you're arguing "no don't make a choice that makes it harder for me!"

I'd argue most of the userbase don't want that choice made either.

You're right of course, if Alpine does adopt, a fork will happen and that fork will be maintained, but I'd very much rather that choice not be made. That's all I expressed.

If the people who prefer to use a worse init system out of convenience wish to do so, they have no shortage of options. This constant splintering and forking of distros, is, I would argue, not a good thing in the shortrun. In the longrun it has no effect but time wasted.

Besides, honestly, if the systemd fans want Alpine with systemd, they should fork it, since they are a minority.

> The only anti-choice position here is YOU. Objectively.

Objectively, not a single thing I've said has been anti-choice. If you feel otherwise, could you quote the excerpt that you think can support your claim?

> Now, I think your position is 100% fine and justified.

Then it would seem most of your comment here is just to hear yourself talk.

> But don't try to bullshit me with some "oh choice!" argument if that's the case.

My only stance has been that I don't want systemd to infect alpine. That's it. You already said you think my position is justified, everything else you've written is arguin against men made of straw. Surely that's not the best use of your time?

> It makes it very hard to take these anti-systemd arguments seriously when people seem hell-bent on covering them in some ideological bullshit.

I see what it is now - you're just making a ton of assumptions, and you come from a place where you prefer and believe systemd is superior, so you don't have a ton of empathy for people that disagree.

So, imagine there is an objectively slow, bad init system, the worst of the bunch. We'll call it dunnit. SO now your distro of choice, against your and most users objections has decided to switch to dunnit.

You don't like that. You have a ton of infrastructure built around this distro, you know it inside and out, and now it's just a disruption. So, sure, you have the choice to fork it, or work with others and fork it, and start maintaining it.

But before your distro adopts dunnit, you could also express that you hope they don't and express dismay that they might. There's nothing wrong with that, it's not an anti-choice sentiment, and it's literally all I did in this thread.

If you go back and read my very first comment. The very first line!

> I don't know where this widespread hallucination that systemd is "forced" came from

This is what I'm addressing. I am not addressing systemd itself, but rather the ideological bullshit that's made up around it. You know, the stuff you subscribe to.

As I've already said, there's plenty of arguments you could make against systemd in Alpine. And I'd probably agree. If you're paying attention, I've already said systemd makes no sense in a distro like Alpine.

But don't try to convince me or anyone else systemd was, or is, "forced". That's just not in line with reality, which would make you delusional. Do you want to be delusional? No, right? Okay, we're on the same page then.