I'm curious: are you trying to rescue a kernel of value from the systemd project where it improves on existing systems, or is this mostly a proof that it didn't need to be built so monolithically in the first place?
The end goal is to drive systemd into a direction that focuses succinctly on process management, having a portable base that can be transposed to other operating systems. Still quite some way to go, but hopefully it'll be done some day. But yeah, supplying systemd's core features for people who would like to have a conservatively developed and focused service manager that won't suddenly swallow the windowing system one day, is a key goal. Captures the gist of it.
Eventually I might transfer control to someone else and focus on my own interests. The eudev project lead has expressed some interest in us.
Well engineered software projects eventually are completed. And then people shouting that anything not actively "maintained" is "depreciated" come in and attempt and succede in using software for political gain or control.
Most of the "Debian Developers" are not the same sort of people that started debian. They are often not programmers.
We who actually write software are looked down by them. The people who use software are looked down upon by them. They are now a middle man, using their position for control, rather than for helping. Like a bad government.
The Debian social contract even says the distro is for the sake of the users.