PC-BSD wouldn't go anywhere if FreeBSD itself stopped offering half-baked (just my opinion) X11 based desktop environments that are barely usable for newcomers. PC-BSD could very well just take over the maintainance of the X11 and desktop environment related ports leaving FreeBSD in charge of the core technologies that are not X11 or DE related.
On the other hand, PC-BSD will cease to exist if FreeBSD provides basic building blocks for a desktop right out of the box.
The Xorg server, drivers, fonts, xdm, TWM, Xterm, etc. From FreeBSD's own stable they just need to add a graphical package manager tool.
For beginners (at least for me, when I started using FreeBSD way back in 2001) setting these up are major stumbling blocks.
I believe if these are available out of the box from a standard installation then all these "Desktop" projects won't be needed.
To the topic of Systemd issue, which I believe got dragged into BSD world due to the road map (assuming there is such a thing
) Linux has taken towards graphical interface.
So, I'll throw my two cents.
Background and disclaimer.
I'm in IT for last 18 years. I work with a German engineering giant, household name there. Few years ago our communications business was carved out and merged with similar business from a Finnish (again a household name there) telecom giant. So you get the hint. I look after a product that we still maintain, enhance and provide to the telecom company that was borne out of the said merger.
So that establishes my technical background.
We use Windows as the desktop machine. All development is done there. All builds are made to pass on Windows, CentOS and FreeBSD. This is where I have a stake in this issue. People running development environments on either CentOS or FreeBSD do so on self initiative, without any IT support.
But wait, we have other lines of business (among few others like space and energy ) that do product development for media and transportation, where they use FreeBSD. Our in flight entertainment system and media system for cruise liners use FreeBSD.
I'm partial to FreeBSD myself, opted for Panasonic smart TV because of that.
First the systemd issue. Not many developers are aware of it. Folks that do architecture have just one concern, systemd seems to be aiming to control everything that exists between kernel and user land applications.
It is a single point of failure.
If it misbehaves you don't even get a half working system (something like Windows safe mode). You may need to reboot.
On technical ground other than this there is no issue. Systemd might do good to Linux world, it will stop the fragmentation.
Coming back to UI part, our own teams would have to take a decision if BSD get stuck in with a graphical stack that is in maintenance mode and is progressively less used by *NIX world.
For us X11 really doesn't matter. All we needs is a kernel mode driver and a pixel manipulation library, if X11 goes away. Simple because, the kind of applications our media and transport guys design always run in kiosk mode with some custom widgets. So strictly speaking no X11 is required.
However it will make it difficult for developers to run any kind of development environment on the target system.
Before someone jumps, I mean something like QtCreator.
So, with SystemD the following are the scenarios
1. Hell with SystemD - We don't need any GUI anyway.
2. Fall in line
3. Develop our own graphical stack, because we can't pay for the default BSD+GUI a.k.a Mac OS.
4. Fit Wayland to work without SystemD.
5. Maintain X11 forever.
For BSD world only #4 and #5 are the options.
Parting thought on #1.
There is no need for FreeBSD to spend money for KMS driver and plethora of ARM builds, if servers alone are the installation target.
On the other hand to be fair to the people asking for #1, no one is forcing the lay users to use FreeBSD as a desktop.
However, it is a blatant lie to say FreeBSD is server only OS (heck, even my TV runs on it).
But I think the truth as always lies somewhere in between.
Probably people that matter realize that the OS as a whole must be capable enough to run a graphical interface. Hence the work on KMS drivers, Wayland port and ARM portability (ARM ... certainly not servers).
Longevity of an OS is due to people using it, people writing applications for it and people keeping it up and running.
It is the third group of people that seems to vocal with #1.
Classic, so called "official" UNIXes must be have learnt this that hard way. For years we have fed with bullshit that critical infrastructure runs on so-called big iron.
For me it was an eye opener when one of the largest telecom providers in India (200 million plus subscribers) gave us firm directive ... only x86 Linux servers.
It is the conservative and vocal minority of the NIX world ... all of them BSDs, big irons, Linux ... combined, that failed to realize the value of decent UI. Hence the place for Wayland and unfortunately in the transition the SystemD guys took advantage of the melee to push their agenda.
Desktop computers are a dying breed anyway. Who are going to use them? Accountants with large spreadsheets, designers and us programmers. That's a very small percentage of total user base.
So, lets not lose sleep over SystemD.
All of our server applications are going to cloud and UI applications are moving to phones.