I find it interesting that when thinking about such things (making
a distro supporting two libcs, or supporting two init systems, or
patching some software to work with the better-known alternative, or...)
the frame of reference is always "adding the support of $biggerthing
to a project that has $smallthing as a characteristic", and never the
opposite.

  It always ends up meaning more burden for the project that typically
has fewer resources, less manpower, and that is only kept afloat by
the superhuman good will and effort of its maintainers.

  Why does nobody ever say "ohey, let's add musl support to Fedora!" ?

>Logging in alpine is in a shit state because openrc doesn't really
>implement logging properly.
>There was some talk about replacing it, no idea what state it is currently in.

  It's still some time away, but the parts of the replacement that
provide better logging are already available on Alpine and could be
used today. It's not yet the case because devs prefer not mix-and-
matching tools and would rather have the full openrc replacement
before performing the switch.

  I have to say I don't really understand why this discussion has gone
to such depths and with such ramifications.

  The issue seems to be that users can squat user/group names that