So what you mean is "Systemd still has serious bugs," which is nothing to do with whether or not everybody is moving at once.
That's the point – if systemd has important bugs they should be fixed. Clearly, the groups responsible for the decision have concluded that the tradeoff is worth it, and have accepted that a large, fundamental change will have issues. That's fine – there are a bunch of other distress you can use that have not adopted systemd, which you can use in the meantime if you disagree.
People are shipping production operating systems with systemd that is chock full of bugs.
An all consuming tentacle monster like systemd is fine if you want to dogfood it but to throw at paying customers and/or supporters of your distribution is a little off key.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_s...
A lot of the bug descriptions are quite scarily bad when you consider them in context such as "various loginctl commands not working" etc.