No, but others would show up. Come on, these things are engineering tradeoffs, with both positive and negative aspects. Even where we disagree about the benefits and disadvantages, we should agree to disagree in a civil way, rather than calling for "in-person confrontations". There are certainly technical complaints to be made about Debian (I could make a long list myself), but Zed's attitude is way out of line.
- config files would be shoved all over the place, without being able to back up /etc as a config location or map frequently read data to var
- You couldn't partition your disks reaosnably beyond a single filesystem as there's no way to predict where apps will shove their junk
- Uninstalling apps would leave junk cron jobs and other files made manually rather than put into include dirs
- Your PATH would be exceedingly long
- You'd end up using 'find' a lot more to know where a particular library is.
I don't think you can consider that locked-in in the slightest--it's not like they changed the DB format or removed the ability to dump a db. Do you really think anyone is going to load up postgres on Fedora, find that it's installed in /var/postgres and not /var/lib/postgres, throw their hands in the air, scream like a girl and then go reinstall Debian? Having stuff moved around can be coped with. I'll be able to transfer the data itself to another disto just fine, thank you very much.
If Debian made it a policy to change packages as little as possible (which is not "not at all"), these problems wouldn't show up.
Also, yes, your shiny PostgreSQL package now matches every other Debian package, but it is different from every non-Debian PostgreSQL install out there. Zed wasn't talking about lock-in for nothing.