[uecker]

Sure, they know best of course ;-) This is the arrogance and gas lightning we are talking about.

But I am not complaining about KDE, they can do whatever they feel best for their projec.t I do not use KDE and - if they make decisions like this - never will.

But please do not tell me my real world experience is an imagination because someone else decided what is best for me. This is like Microsoft telling me I need to like clippy.

[redeeman]

its not just KDE, its pretty much everyone in the space.

I explicitly said im sure some have worse experience with wayland, perhaps read what I wrote?

Are you denying wayland is net benefit for the majority?

[uecker]

Yes, I do not believe for a second that wayland is a net benefit for the majority. Every improvement one can have in Wayland could have been implemented in X without breaking compatibility, without causing all the regressions and limitations that are waived away so arrogantly, without fracturing the community, and also ten years earlier.

[redeeman]

it couldnt have been done without breaking compatibility. not while actually solving problems.

This is what the actual X developers are saying, which coincidentally are also the wayland developers, and several downstream projects like gnome/kde.

SOME of the issues could have some solutions implemented, but far from all. just look at xlibre, before they even came to functionality they broke stuff in changing things - which they admittedly have fixed for now, but lets follow that and see how far they go.

on one side we have all the developers of Xorg etc saying one thing, and you(and others, that I presume are not involved with Xorg) saying another.

Wayland could have also been 10 years earlier, but because most people just coasted on xorg, which I agree has been kinda reasonable, nobody really took it serious until recently.

you are also moving the goalpost in regards of net benefit. Just because SOME things could be done in X, doesnt mean its not also a benefit to have it in wayland.