Hate is most certainly deserved. How you treat someone, hate or not -- well, that's a different matter.
However, part of the 'hate' aspect is that the way that systemd is making it into the kernel, and into every distro, is not based upon traditional meritocratic principles. It is not that Lennart is not skilled, merely that he holds incredible influence and political power through Redhat. And, that Redhat's power and tendrils spread everywhere, including the Gnome foundation.
This political power is FORCING systemd into distros. Some distros (like Debian) are doing what they can to defang systemd and including it... but it becomes more onerous daily.
Without this political power, systemd would NOT be where it is today. It would ABSOLUTELY not be in Debian, and many other distros. While you may contests some of my points above, one thing that is an actual fact is that this is the key reason for the hate.
Not the software. Not the quality of the product. Rather, the use of political power (intended or not!) based upon Redhat's money, instead of based upon merit. And yet, Redhat has done a lot of things for the community based upon that money, but this one is a TRAGEDY. And, that political power is bypassing all of the traditional checks and bounds the community has, which would normally FORCE an author of a product to shape up, or see his product ostracized!
And that, most certainly, is deserving of hate. And further? It isn't only Lennart that my hate is targeted ate. I see him as a problem, and Redhat as the real target.
Lastly. Redhat. I started with Redhat 4 (not RHEL) in 96. I switched to Debian as soon as possible, because back then? Debian wasn't just twice the product, or 10 times the product... Redhat was a *joke* comparatively.
It should be known, and it *is* known by anyone with a sense of history, that Redhat and most other commercialized distros learned MANY THINGS from Debian. The list of firsts is endless. The adoption by Redhat and others, was a constant catch-up game.
Fast forward almost 20 years. As expected, many of the 'core' things, such as online updates (yum = apt), automatic dependency resolution, installation of a distro in a 'secure' state, the list goes on, have been adopted by Redhat. And, in my profession, I work with many distros on a daily basis.
And Redhat? Every time I work with it, I find bugs that you would never find in Debian. Every. Single. Time. Their QA process is not up to snuff. Hell, I've even run into *their own configuration tools* not working, on a point release (should be more bugs squashed), and this from a company with the cash for QA that Redhat has!
My point? This poor dev methodology is showing with the hap-hazard adoption of systemd by Redhat. Its inclusion and dependency by Gnome, via Redhat's influence, is a CLEAR indicator of the problems internal to development at Redhat. What baked design philosophy would allow for a dependency on a project that has *no* *clear* *design* *specification*. Systemd has grown enormously, has morphed and changed repeatedly, and before it has even stabilized as a product?
Everything depends upon it?!
This is so ass backwards, it is like designing a car body, when the size, power, or weight distribution of the engine has not even been determined!
No. Hate is deserved. How you treat someone, hate or not -- well, that's a different matter.
But the hate? It deserves to exist.