You've rewritten history to pretend you're right. Then you follow up with more drivel? Sorry, aside from trolling, what is your point?
This seems pretty clear that GNOME used to depend on systemd. How am I rewriting anything? https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Hard_dependencies_on_systemd#Pa...
I thought you were the same as the other person. You're continuing the same argument, so it really doesn't matter if you're the same or not: "quickly made systemd a hard requirement" is bullshit. Further, it could easily be worked around.
If you notice e.g. the history of Ubuntu it happens regularly that you hold back a component if there's a problem integrating it. This happens across multiple distributions. It isn't something unique, nor special.
GNOME nor Red Hat did NOT "quickly made systemd a hard requirement". Gentoo was great to ensure that the API that was depended upon was implemented separately. Aside from that, a distribution could also hold back the logind change that caused this change. Skipping over all of these details is great to make this into some big conspiracy story. However, it is rewriting history. It wasn't something unique. Yeah, GNOME release team misjudged one thing. But it actually took a few years before it became an issue. Not this drivel with "OMG they added a hard dependency". It wasn't like that.
AFAIK the GNOME Wayland session still depends on logind, but that's more because there has been no interest in getting it to work on BSD yet.