Thanks Daan for your contributions to systemd.

If you were not a systemd maintainer and have started this project/company independently targeting systemd, you would have to go through the same process as everyone and I would have expected the systemd maintainers to, look at it objectively and review with healthy skepticism before accepting it. But we cannot rely on that basic checks and balances anymore and that's the most worrying part.

> that might be disruptive optional in systemd

> we don't always succeed and there will always be differences in opinion.

You (including other maintainers) are still the final arbitrator of what's disruptive. The differences of opinion in the past have mostly been settled as "deal with it" and that's the basis of current skepticism.

Systemd upstream has reviewers and maintainers from a bunch of different companies, and some independent: Red Hat, Meta, Microsoft, etc. This isn't changing, we'll continue to work through consensus of maintainers regardless of which company we work at.