Its an argument about whether you want an init that is just an init, or an init that is designed as an extra layer of the OS.
If they were comparable (i.e. if systemd was just an init system) there would be no debate.
it does not help that the systemd devs are obnoxious and dismissive of concerns about compatibility. Lots of "its your problem" in their bug tracker on github.
Thanks to your summary, I finally understand. So it's about whether it's a small tool that only handles init, or whether it handles multiple layers. That's the issue.
Thank you. I didn't know why there was a debate since the size difference between them is quite significant. so I don't know much about the Linux side. Have a good day.