Poettering: Revisiting how we put together Linux systems

This vision of putting together Linux systems could be implemented in a highly controlled env only (basically in-house), behind which a formal organization stands, with responsibilities and accountability, and whose customer base and its requirements are focused, predictable, and served in a controlled manner.

Adopting it to Linux, UNIX, BSD* ecosystems (independent projects, distros,
OSs) would be a disaster, a chaos of components and people (many of whom are volunteers).

The argument that the current status of that ecosystem is not better does not take into account the model of its development, which is mostly voluntary, contributory, and of bazaar type. The also-ran distros, unmaintained projects or distros are a natural part of it if you accept the idea of market forces at work or just freedom to experiment and educate.
This model does not prevent a formation of professional organizations around it, which are free to pick and choose and mold it all according to their idea of the next best "Slowaris", on their own terms, but outside of it. The point is to not allow them to monopolize it or force their ideas onto it.

So, learn from the systemd "voluntary enforcement" debacle, please.
The title of this article should be instead:
"Poettering: Revisiting how we put together Linux systems at Red Hat"

jb