[The_Colonel]

Ah, this thought stopping argument again.

X11 is garbage which nobody wants to maintain, let alone develop. It's a very archaic design which is patched via extensions to sorta support some modern concepts which negate the network transparency anyway.

Both Wayland and systemd have a very wide developer consensus, because they finally provide a maintainable solution to their respective problems. The drama is constructed by a small minority of contrarians.

[account42]

Wayland might have some developer consensus for the base protocol. Not so much for extensions to make it actually usable on a desktop. By the time it does it will be a patchwork as complex as X11 - it's already getting there with things like requiring PipeWire for simple things like capturing the screen.

[andreyv]

Old does not mean bad. Even a decade later Wayland struggles to provide basic features that were built in the X protocol.

[FeepingCreature]

When rewriting apps, people have a tendency to say: "well, Oldversion provides X. We could make a Newversion that provides X better, but that's hard so maybe X is actually bad? We should provide Y instead." Then they're confused when nobody with X needs wants to use Newversion.

[petepete]

Which ones do you have in mind? I don't miss X in the slightest.

[treadmill]

Xmodmap

[The_Colonel]

It's OK to use X until Wayland has support for the missing features. I don't really care what I'm running. But it's clear that X is not in shape to see significant development (e.g. to support new needs) in the coming decades.