I would assume this is about systemd. Personally my experience with it has been great - the occasional screw-ups (they did happen - something related to dbus made all systemctl commands fail until a reboot) were nothing compared to the time I gained not having to worry about prehistoric initscripts.
So while it isn't perfect, it's IMO a step in the right direction, if only by lowering the barrier to entry to actually using and managing the thing.
If you are worried about stability then you shouldn't rely on a single machine anyway. Personally I manage systemd screw-ups (though I haven't had one in production yet - all of them were on my personal machines while monkeying around with Archlinux) just like any other hardware failure - by making sure my app/service stays available even if I yank the power cord from the machine.
So while it isn't perfect, it's IMO a step in the right direction, if only by lowering the barrier to entry to actually using and managing the thing.
If you are worried about stability then you shouldn't rely on a single machine anyway. Personally I manage systemd screw-ups (though I haven't had one in production yet - all of them were on my personal machines while monkeying around with Archlinux) just like any other hardware failure - by making sure my app/service stays available even if I yank the power cord from the machine.