|
|
|
|
|
by akira2501
852 days ago
|
|
> outside of the XWayland scope given the diminishing developer interest and lots of talk but little action by those anti-Wayland holdouts in the community to actually contribute to X.Org Server development. I don't know.. maybe they're actually rising to this "challenge." Although, I've never understood why the presence of Wayland means X.Org needs to disappear. To me it seems part of our modern churlish desktop software cult that is perennially annoyed that their new systems, while slightly more visually appealing, have actually removed more useful features than they have added and fail to be a compelling upgrade on their own. So, instead of making anything better, they focus on destroying what already exists. |
|
It doesn't, except for a few annoying facts:
* Most of the people who maintained X.org are sick and tired of it, have moved on to Wayland (or completely unrelated) work.
* No one has stepped up to work on the non-XWayland parts of X.org to the level that's needed to describe it as more than just in maintenance mode.
* Popular GUI toolkits seem to be moving on. GTK, for example, still accepts bug fixes for the X11 backend, but they aren't really working on it. I expect at whatever point maintaining the X11 backend and keeping it up with core changes becomes too big a burden, they'll drop it entirely. I don't know what Qt's stance is, but I wouldn't be surprised if momentum has or will move more toward their Wayland backend.
The end result here is that X.org eventually will be the less-stable, less-featureful platform. It's going to take a while to get to that point (Wayland clearly still has a ways to go), but it feels inevitable, unless some interested parties decide to step up to maintain the non-XWayland parts of X.org and the X11 backends of the popular GUI toolkits.