Positions forming in the Debian init system discussion

the API relevant to those applications is X11 for display. The fact that different apps use different toolkits to talk to that API is not a big deal (as long as the toolkits are willing to co-exist, which they are)

I'd argue that while having a low-level API like X11 is useful, it would be even more useful to have a standardised toolkit API, which exists at a higher level (ie. less verbose) and is hence easier to program in. One can of course change the look + etc, through re-implementing the API, but not breaking it. Standardisation at a higher level can be applied to many other parts of the stack.

The main point is to draw a line of standardisation (and hence stability) somewhere in the overall stack, in order to achieve a sweet spot between 2 factors: customisability and ease of use, both from the point of view of writing end user applications. End user applications and users are the entire reason operating systems exist in the first place -- many people in the open source world seem to forget this.

Right now the trade-off between the 2 factors is completely out of whack. The only thing that's standardised in the Linux world is the kernel, glibc and to a large extent the mess that's X11. In almost everywhere else though, we have lots of customisability along with associated costs of piss poor API stability. GTK is still a moving target (deprecating and adding APIs at an uncomfortable rate). Qt is a bit better, but it has gone through many major releases in a relatively short span.

Enough is enough. Any efforts to standardise low-level plumbing though software such as systemd are very welcome.

It is of course pertinent to note that there is already one Linux-based system which has taken stability seriously: Android. It's also relevant to note that the number of tablets and phones running Android easily eclipses the "traditional" Linux desktop.