You'll never find me saying that Wayland development is good in its present state. I think it's a mess and it has a lot of issues.
But let's be honest about Xorg. The overwhelming majority of people who worked on Xorg are now developing Wayland. Why? Because developing Xorg is a massive pain in the butt. It is a 400K LOC behemoth of a project and it has a ridiculous amount of technical debt. I would have to imagine that if the Xorg developers thought they could fix Xorg, they would do that instead of making a new thing.
charcircuit•33m ago
There wasn't a need to have 10s of different wayland compositors. There is not a need to endlessly bikeshed over extentions instead of delivering user value. These are failures of leadership in driving the replacement of X.
Just compare this to Windows and how they made this rearchitecture of making their compositor more modern without splitting into 10s of compositors and breaking a ton of apps.
bryanlarsen•12m ago
"Failures of leadership" implies that leadership actually exists. Does it?
dvntsemicolon•4d ago
But let's be honest about Xorg. The overwhelming majority of people who worked on Xorg are now developing Wayland. Why? Because developing Xorg is a massive pain in the butt. It is a 400K LOC behemoth of a project and it has a ridiculous amount of technical debt. I would have to imagine that if the Xorg developers thought they could fix Xorg, they would do that instead of making a new thing.
charcircuit•33m ago
Just compare this to Windows and how they made this rearchitecture of making their compositor more modern without splitting into 10s of compositors and breaking a ton of apps.
bryanlarsen•12m ago