|
|
|
|
|
|
by uecker
24 days ago
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
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.