I'll chip in my contribution here anyway, despite an answer being accepted, J. Chomel.
Roundup is a big issue - I haven't used it for 8 years once I found out its worse than glyphosate on its own, because of the other additives contained within it making it, in theory, 'more effective' but also far more toxic. In the early days, Roundup was marketed as 'bio degradable within 7 days' a claim which appeared on the label of the product. This had to be removed from the advertising and packaging within two years of its appearance, because it turned out not to be true at all. I have used glyphosate concentrate occasionally, in particular as a treatment on ground elder, once or twice, after which it gets dug out, so no further use of the product is required. Even though I've been a professional gardener, I've had the same bottle of glyphosate concentrate for eight years, since stopping using Roundup, and it's only a 500ml bottle.
What's not clear to me from what I've read so far is whether the EU is particularly concerned about Roundup, or glyphosate in particular, everything I've seen so far appears to be conflating the two products, or mentioning one and the other as if they are interchangeable when they are not, and that I will do more research on for my own interest.
Most good gardeners I have known only use pesticides and herbicides when its essential, and then only sparingly, particularly in the UK. The problem with ordinary home gardening is the people who are not really gardeners, and who believe general routine applications of various chemicals is the way to go and will save them time, not really wanting to become 'gardeners' as such. Or worse, ignorance causing them to use more toxic substances in the false belief they are somehow less toxic than a bottle of chemical stuff - petrol, deisel, bleach or salt, for instance, which whilst they may represent no threat to the human using it, will poison the soil for quite some time.
However, all of this pales into insignificance when you look at agriculture - the biggest users of Roundup are agricultural crop growers, and particularly those who are growing GM crops (luckily for us, not in the UK, yet). Monsanto particularly created GM crops resistant to glyphosate, meaning growers could broadcast glyphosate on the crops on a regular basis, thereby killing the weeds but not the crop. This seems to me to involve questionable ethics, but this is probably not the place to have that conversation. And this agricultural use of glyphosate/roundup on a wide scale is why the EU is looking at not extending the licence for Roundup in particular, rather than home gardeners spraying the weeds occasionally. It will inevitably have a knock on effect on home gardeners, but here, there's nothing unusual about that, many weedkillers and fungicides particularly have been withdrawn - now, there is currently no effective chemical fungicide available to amateur gardeners in the UK, although I do not believe that is true in the USA, where pre-emergent weedkillers are still in use, along with some fungicides we can no longer use here. As a result of that, there has been a consequent growth in knowledge re the 'organic' method of dealing with fungal infection - milk treatments for both powdery mildew and black spot, for instance. Peat is now not available here and hasn't been for some years, and is restricted to a minimal percentage in commercial potting composts; that came about for the same reasons - use by agriculture and horticultural businesses rather than home users being the major problem. As far as I can tell, peat appears to be still freely available in the USA.
There are, clearly, times when a herbicide has to be used, on pernicious and persistent weeds - eradicating ground elder is next to impossible without use of a herbicide at some stage in the proceedings, but whether that herbicide has to be glyphosate is another matter - it doesn't, really, other herbicides are available, but glyphosate (as Roundup) was well marketed by Monsanto and has become the obvious and most well known choice for the average gardener, and the most freely available. I personally would applaud its withdrawal, but technically, it won't be a withdrawal - it will be a refusal to relicence the product for use within the EU, which means it will, presumably, still be freely available in the USA and other parts of the world.
To come back to the last sentence of your question, its a definite that Aegopodium will grow more easily than roses, and not only will it grow, it will spread as far and wide as it is able to without meeting a large, physical obstruction, or severely inhospitable conditions. If we want to cultivate certain plants in our gardens, then weeds do have to be dealt with; many can be hoed out or dug out or simply pulled out by hand, weed fabric and mulches will help, but Aegopodium, along with one or two other pernicious weeds, will require some chemical intervention along with the more traditional approach of digging out. Education and knowledge is key, because certain chemical treatments will always be required; knowing how much you need and exactly when, using whatever it is judiciously and rarely, rather than expecting to be able to manage certain things on a wing and prayer, or with a pile of mulch or many other 'alternative' methods isn't going to work for those rare occasions. To put it in perspective, if you have a cold, you don't need antibiotics, you need TLC - but if the cold develops into a serious pnuemonia, you probably do need antibiotics, even though the treatment will kill both good and bad bacteria in the body. There's always a price for everything, and the same principle applies in gardening.
