1. The old, mostly working thing waits your commit
2. That new thing can have some help too
I recommend developers story about this "mostly working thing" (2014) [1]. It is quite fun and eye opening, he clearly knows his subject better than most of the comments.
Wayland demo worked almost from day one. I've run it in 2010 [2]. But we need applications, that is migrating toolkits and this took 10 years.
It is very toxic development culture, cancel culture, mob.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQh_DmDLKQ
[2] https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?pid=858020#p858020
I do browser-based screensharing (of both individual windows and the whole screen), I have a mixed DPI monitor setup, I've played games on Steam, &c. I need no workarounds. GNOME just works.
About the only things I don't use are nvidia's crappy drivers.
Hope it works out for you.
1. Gaming. Just about nobody games on Linux with nVidia. Most people I know who game (from Linux) with nVidia GPUs use PCI passthrough to a guest VM running Windows. Very few use nVidia GPUs on their host system. My primary setup is a 2950x/128GB DDR4/Vega 56/2080 Super -- the latter goes to kvm exclusively.
2. "Research" such as machine learning. You don't need Wayland or X11 for this, and the proprietary drivers work the best. To be honest, this is a space where Ubuntu Server performs best. I keep one of these around in a VM (see above) for this purpose. (Mining also goes in this category)
Everything else can probably be done with an Intel or AMD GPU tbh.
I guess I'm the oddball here. 95% of my gaming is native Steam Linux apps on my Kubuntu box with a GTX1060 6GB.
GamingOnLinux stats — AMD GPU 40% and raising.
https://www.gamingonlinux.com/index.php?module=statistics&vi...
Anyone who wants stable, performant GPU today can buy AMD. Future is here. That's Wayland target.
I live in the past — Intel GPU, X.Org, xmonad. I've thought to wait a few more years but I've checked Sway, it works. I'll check waymonad, maybe it works, maybe I'll make it work.
Wayland GNOME and KDE works with NVIDIA.
Strange point, it should have been burned 10 years ago than. I use X.Org, works perfectly in Arch Linux, some claim problems on in their distribution. It should be critique of that distribution.
> Chromium is making its first shy bumbling steps towards actually working on Wayland
And Firefox support is behind MOZ_ENABLE_WAYLAND=1 flag. Clearly Wayland is in "early adopters" stage. Early adopters should not whine.
> By the same logic, anyone can say that the direction they're taking is bad.
You've clearly not watched presentation. Some people know better than developer of that technology. It would be insult on my job. I've had enough people stating "technical debt is not real".
> Dear Google Cloud: Your Deprecation Policy Is Killing You
Open source is nothing like Google deprecating its services, anyone can run code, but it is naive to expect free indefinite support.
Truth is you are not going to maintain X.Org.
yes.
Surely that fulfills both contribution and prediction.
I therefore disagree with your characterization.
Now, he appears to have been wrong, but just like preachers may be wrong, critics may also be right even without contribution.
He knew Bible and he was right by his interpretation of Bible. In programming world word is reality, there is only one meaning. Those who know word forge reality. This requires knowledge.
Critics who do not posses knowledge appeal to emotions, spread FUD. They may be right by coincidence like standing clocks.
Because I think you used it wrong.
I've described context. You've confirmed it. Statement supported not by fact but by inner voice. My morale stems from Christianity, I believe Enlightenment got it right — discovery of nature is discovery of God. I've been to church, I've seen priest who shared joy. I've seen other priests, I would rather not see them.
X.Org developer described what's wrong with the project [1]. Not one of the Wayland critiques addressed his points. They have no facts, they just want it to fail. Those who work hard and share for free get anger in return. Sway / wlroots maintainer (ddevault) got off the edge from this misinformation and I do not agree with him but I am not maintainer either. Where is love and God in this story?
> That’s not even considering any personal goals, which I have vanishingly little time for. I get zero exercise, and though my diet is mostly reasonable the majority of it is delivery unless I get the odd 2 hours to visit the grocery store. That is, unless I want to spend those 2 hours with my friends, which means it’s back to delivery. My dating life is almost nonexistent. I want to spend more time studying Japanese, but it’s either that or keeping up with my leisure reading. Lofty goals of also studying Chinese or Arabic are but dust in the wind. I’m addicted to caffeine, again.
> Less healthy ways have included walking to the corner store to buy unhealthy comfort foods, consuming alcohol or weed too much or too often, getting in stupid internet arguments, being mean to my friends and colleagues, and googling myself to read negative comments. [3]
That's story behind Linux infrastructure. Because of such work I have Linux and I am grateful for it, but no mob wants to finish them.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQh_DmDLKQ
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24896917
[3] https://drewdevault.com/2020/01/21/Stress-and-happiness.html
Which is why I think it's the wrong term, and why utxaa was confused.
Your link to Google for a dictionary definition says:
1) deliver a sermon or religious address to an assembled group of people, typically in church.
This wasn't a sermon or religious address, and HN isn't church.
2) publicly proclaim or teach (a religious message or belief).
Okay, so posting a comment on HN is public, which means we're all preaching? This doesn't seem what you mean.
3) earnestly advocate (a belief or course of action).
This is the closest. However, "this is all going to end in X12" seem far from earnest advocacy.
Your own comments seem far more earnest - are you not also preaching?
It's far easier for me to believe you simply used the wrong term.
sure pal, you got it.
* print is function
* string is unicode by default
Should have been clean and easy migration path
# python 2
from __future__ import print_function
print(u"foo")
u"" # was u""
b"" # was ""
Python 3.0.0 Dec. 3, 2008
Python 3.3.0 Sept. 29, 2012
Ruby 1.8.7 2008-05-31
Ruby 1.9.1 2009-01-30 # first 1.9
Ruby 1.9.2 2010-08-18 # people already switched to 1.9
Ruby 2.0.0 2013-02-24 # first 2.0
Ruby 1.8.7-p352 2013-06-27 # last 1.8
How specifically Wayland harms you? I've opened GTK+ tutorial [5], compiled code, works both on X.Org and Wayland. How it is not clean migration path?
And no, it is not XWayland which is additional migration path, I've removed it for this test:
$ xterm
xterm: Xt error: Can't open display: :1
[2] https://www.python.org/downloads/
[3] https://medium.com/rubycademy/the-evolution-of-ruby-strings-...
[4] https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/releases/
[5] https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/stable/gtk-getting-started....
Sorry, have you tried to maintain a C extension for both 2/3? Or a unicode heavy application?
This is a silly statement, there's a reason that major packages took a decade to migrate. There are thousands of little details that are incompatible.
Nothing required big 2/3 change. Ruby and Go done it right — a series of small changes. Python 2.* had it right. The attitude of language developers was clearly stated in PEP 414 and 2to3 approach — no backward compatibility. That is nonsense, every python program had backward compatibility several minor versions deep.
Select one issue and work on it. Unicode:
# python prev
u"" # or from __future__ import unicode_literals
b""
# python next
u""
b"" # or from __past__ import binary_literals
Wayland transition is nothing like Python 2/3. It is big but mostly invisible, XWayland runs X11 applications, toolkits hide implementation details, no X.Org deprecation.
The situation with wayland migration seem to be somewhat similar with the python 3 migration. Many gui apps that uses gui toolkit probably don't need major modification, or no modification at all. But some apps that requires platform-specific access are heavily affected and might require some major refactor, and they probably won't do it until the benefit of migrating to wayland outweigh staying on xorg.
Also, unlike python 3 migration where most of the community agree that the move is justifiable will have to happen eventually, in the case of wayland migration, the community opinion seem to be split which certainly harm wayland migration progress.
$ python3.2
Python 3.2.6 (default, Oct 26 2020, 15:29:09)
[GCC 10.2.0] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> u"foo"
File "<stdin>", line 1
u"foo"
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
$ python3
Python 3.8.6 (default, Sep 30 2020, 04:00:38)
[GCC 10.2.0] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> u"foo"
'foo'
> Django 1.5 introduces support for Python 3 - specifically, Python 3.2 and above.
Notice version gap — no support for 3.0, 3.1. It was quite common.
> python 3 migration where most of the community agree that the move is justifiable
If people believed breaking change was justified they would move to 3.0, it did not happen.
I've seen both Python and Ruby community, Ruby made two breaking changes (1.9 and 2.0) while Python got its PEP 414. There was a huge split among developers.
---
Essentially you are describing how switch happened while I'm describing which lessons should have been learned. It is sad if Python community learned nothing.
> the community opinion seem to be split which certainly harm wayland migration progress.
Developers done great job, you can't run 2.7 code in 3.*, you can run X11 applications in XWayland. Is there a split in developers community? All I see is FUD among users.
[1] https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/3.1/releases/1.5/#python-3...
$ sudo pacman -Rs xorg-server-xwayland
I've been Python developer at that time, the writing was on the wall. They have not provided migration path. PEP 414 "Complaint: This PEP may harm adoption of Python 3.2" [3], this is insane. Community voted with feet — they've stayed with Python 2 until clean migration path arrived. I've switched to Ruby and been happy since.
Ruby 1.8.7 was supported for five years.
You had to write Python 2 code and run 2to3, you had to live in the past or abandon it.
[1] https://raku.org/archive/doc/apocalypse.html
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Python#Features
From what i understand there are commits, just not releases. What is the point of committing if the maintainers do not bother to make a proper release that your work can be distributed to the users?
[1] https://github.com/freedesktop/xorg-xserver/graphs/commit-ac...
So why aren't release being made?
> The primary development code repository can be found at:
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver
Quite a lot of issues.
[0] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1092
> Xorg xserver above 1.20.8-3 crashes when using displaylink/evdi
> Applications do not repaint in a timely fashion, resulting in screen corruption
> xorg-x11-server quit unexpectedly on windows resize
> x11-base/xorg-server-1.20.8-r1 crashes
> Xorg crashes after unlocking with lightdm
> Input events can be sent for disabled device, crashing GTK and mutter
> when ubuntu runing Virtualbox, Ctal+Alt+F1 Ctal+Alt+F17 switch cause memleak
> Server crash at startup
> Delay and black screen when the screen is rotated.
> xorg-server-1.20.9 crash on startup
I don't get why Wayland is slow, when Enlightenment was fast on machines with 32MB of RAM, a 3dfx Voodoo, a spinning HDD, and a 66MHz CPU...
The laptop in question is from the late 2016.
So much for "the world that is". My machine must be very, very otherworldly.
I have. It was written by someone who doesn't know the difference between a "client" and a "server".
+----------------+ +----------------+
| Client +---->+ Server |
| | | |
| +-----------+ | | +-----------+ |
| |X Server +<---------+Application| |
| +-----------+ | | +-----------+ |
| | | |
+----------------+ +----------------+
No. This is the thinking of people who can't see the utility of a use case they never personally use. It's the thinking of people who believe that "ssh -X" is "obsolete" because RDP exists, or that window managers can become obsolete because the fashion has moved on. X works, it's worked for decades, and saying that it's never worked doesn't negate that.
Sure, all the software can stay where they are if all the developers had to serve is you. But that is just not the reality.
Yes, we need a newer web browser, but that could run on old-school Linux/Unix just fine. Aside from that, there isn't anything wrong with nineties Linux which couldn't have been brought up to modern standards with a bit more discipline.
Someone decided ALSA (or OSS, it doesn't matter) was rough to deal with, so they build Pulse and JACK on top of it, rather than a modest expansion of ALSA. Someone didn't like the network layer, so they build a userspace wrapper, and someone didn't like that, so they wrapped it up in a GUI.
At the end of the day:
1) Everything is slow, requiring literally more than 100x the resources it once did.
2) Everything is complex, with layers upon layers, and text files with comments "This is managed by my hack. DO NOT EDIT THIS BY HAND. I keep the exact same data elsewhere, in my own config file, since I couldn't be bothered to read what's in the line below."
3) Everything is brittle and hard-to-understand. I knew how nineties Linux booted. Today, the logic is distributed among dozens of layers, mostly because people wanted to reinvent new things, rather than polishing/improving/fixing old ones. Different apps go for the wrong layer, and tutorials point to the wrong ones too.
Now Ubuntu is throwing its hands up at the mess, and building snap to hide all this under yet. another. layer.
As a footnote, ALSA was just about the last time this happened right, with it replacing OSS while maintaining compatibility.
I don't use pulseaudio, networkmanager, desktop environment, works perfectly in Arch Linux [1]. Arch has great wiki, it is correct. System is quite transparent.
I am fine with systemd but, for example, Void Linux [2] uses runit, Alpine Linux [3] uses OpenRC and is compiled statically.
Arch Linux pacman serves my needs perfectly, it is quick, it shows only relevant information. AUR provides ready made PKGBUILDs.
Lots of Linux distributions is its strength. It allows people with niche requirements find its home. We are far better members of societies when supporting our system than grunting.
Unless you want to ship something, troubleshoot something, or figure out how something works without hours of googling.
I have never had problems distributing binary builds for Linux. There are a number of system libraries that are backwards compatible: glibc, asound, libGL, etc. - test on the oldest you want to support and any other libs you just ship yourself. And that would not be different with only one distro either unless you only care about one release of that distro.
Ship and troubleshoot solved by distro maintaires. Niche products solved by Flatpak and its runtimes.
What I find strange is sitting on the place one does not like. There are so many choices around.
1) I'm not ready to jump installed systems to arch right now.
2) Next system I install will probably try arch.
Thank you!
Gentoo is feeling left out. It's the OG distro for those who have strong opinions on how their system sould work but not strong enough to do eveything by hand.
I've switched to Arch Linux, base install covers network configuration. It gave me stable platform, I can grow my knowledge, I can fix my system.
Void Linux and Alpine Linux are just examples of what could match voiced concerns. I lot of people recommend Manjaro, looks like a simple way to try Arch based distro. Some problems stem from upgrading release, Debian Testing could help. But I have not tried them.
I've tried Ubuntu, I don't like distribution upgrades, default theme, constant experiments on users. Gentoo is my first distro, as C++ dev at that time, compilation was fascinating. I still enjoy 3 commands joke [1], looks like it is possible to install binary packages these days. I've tried Alpine, I don't like apk, systemd and glibc are good enough for me. I've tried OpenBSD, hardware support was not as good as on Linux. I'm playing with NixOS but I am so used to Arch.
And I want to stress, each of these system has something I enjoy. It is just me who is driven by minimizing negative points.
Nah, even ALSA was a needless overcomplicated mess. They should have just built on top of the super simple /dev/dsp. Instead we got new incompatible APIs wile OSS apps were left with requiring exclusive access to your sound card.
It had dmix.
Part of that is working Bluetooth, power management, webcams, video conferencing, OBS, and similar. Historically, OpenBSD was behind Linux on working reliably.
Debian used to do this before:
1) It fell behind on hardware support, as laptops took over desktops; and
2) Ubuntu/Fedora started putting out massive numbers of half-baked technologies, and everything building atop those.
I switched to Ubuntu, without Gnome, but increasingly, things don't work without Ubuntu's UX, and snap shows a future I don't want to head down anymore.
I'll look into arch linux, as someone suggested.
Webcams and power management work fine on OpenBSD (assuming there exist drivers for your hardware), but Bluetooth isn’t supported at all.
What I like about it is the simplicity of everything. If you want to change your mouse sensitivity, you add a line to a particular file in /etc. If you want to autojoin a particular WiFi network, you add the SSID and password to a particular file in /etc. If you want to start a daemon on boot... you get the idea. No massive complex configuration systems with giant blobs of XML that nobody understands.
Unfortunately the flip side is that things move more slowly — they won’t support Bluetooth until someone writes code that meets the system’s bar for correctness, simplicity, reliability, documentation, etc. — which might be never. But the stuff that does work is fantastic.
If hardware/software support requirements tie you to more mainstream OSs, I do agree with other posters that Arch is the closest thing to what you want, but it’s still far from perfect.
Do you know if:
1) Zoom works? Linux has a blob which does.
2) OBS works? This is critical.
3) How is video support with ATI/Nvidia? Will my multimonitor setup break?
The other thing which scares me is the manual upgrade process. On my systems, I've done apt-get update/dist-upgrade for a quarter century now, with never an issue.
2) I don’t know.
3) AFAIK it should work.
Using the BSDs as a workstation, rather than a server, is a bit niche. Like Linux, but even more so. So unfortunately it’s still a labor of love and a lot of modern stuff won’t be supported.
Meanwhile I want my Linux system to run VR, multiple 4K displays, very demanding games and bluetooth headphones. And Linux is the worst for it, because everything feels laggy and half polished there and on the proprietary OS my setup feels MUCH faster.
Sure, it's not Linux's fault, but let's stop saying everything is fine and dandy because Emacs is still running.
What we're arguing is why everything is not fine.
SGIs ran VR, multiple displays, and very demanding apps in the nineties too. They did all sorts of wonky, complex, 3d input devices too. So did DEC Alphas. This is the stuff Unix was built for.
My claim is that nineties Linux was much closer to having the right architecture for it than 2020 Linux for this sort of stuff. The reinventions and onion layers didn't help; they hurt.
I think the only piece nineties Linux didn't anticipate was the level of hot-swapping hardware (USB, Bluetooth, displays, etc.), and the level of power management. Modern Linux never got that architected or integrated quite right, because it was built with hack upon hack upon kludge. It's split up in bizarre ways between kernel and user space which would be really tough to clean up right now.
They did, modular kernels date back as 2.2 at least. And USB was born in that era.
* My USB webcams wouldn't show up in a different order each time I reboot. This works fine under Windows and Mac.
* My monitor configuration wouldn't be hardcoded in my xorg config file, or swapped around manually with xrandr. I'd have a way to code up config options for whatever is plugged in, and if something unanticipated happens, it'd do something reasonable until I coded that config in too.
* I wouldn't need to reconfigure my drawing tablet to connect to the right monitor each time I plug it in.
* The system wouldn't get into an unrecoverable, unstable state with e.g. an unreliable USB cable.
.. and so on. It's designed for a fixed set of hardware, with layers on top of that to support hotswapping. I don't have "USB 4k Logitech Webcam" on the native level. I have /dev/video3. I then have layers to map names back.
Same thing with HDDs too, actually. I refer to them as /dev/sdc4, rather than by a GUID or name or similar. Layers with onions.
$ ls /dev/disk/by-uuid/
266c945c-1c6d-40e7-b770-73864a5541fa
$ cat /etc/fstab
UUID=266c945c-1c6d-40e7-b770-73864a5541fa /1) https://www.raspberrypi.org/documentation/installation/insta...
2) man fdisk
3) man mkfs
And so on. The /dev/sd_ is primary, with UUIDs as kind of an afterthought
It ought to be the other way around, with UUIDs as the primary, proper, canonical name and interface, and a legacy backwards-compatibility layer for /dev/sd_ devices. It's even reflected in the directory structure. Yes, I CAN list disk "by-uuid," label, id, partuuid, or path, but those are special cases with sd_ as canonical.
It's kinda retrokludged in there. I never said USB/etc. didn't work. Just that it wasn't architected for it.
Not really, it is just a pile of hacks on top of hacks, starting by everything is a file until one needs to use sockets.
Also I think 3dfx Voodoo was the magic pixie dust, once you ever go OpenGL, you're not going back.
EFL is written in C so it does have to work within the limitations of C but -non-toy- GUIs are inherently object oriented so things will be a bit more complicated than Qt that can lean on C++'s support for object oriented programming. Especially since apparently EFL also supports bindings to other languages which may also make things a bit more complicated.
Luckily I got an opportunity to a new project. And the company in question (Samsung) ultimately dropped it IIRC.
I gave it as an example of something which ran rather sophisticated theming/compositing/effects on hardware at least 2 orders of magnitude slower than today, and something which modern Ubuntu/Fedora struggle with.
I'd encourage you to compare the specs of the 3dfx Voodoo (the "magic dust") to even bottom-barrel integrated graphics of 2020.
Except that X11 is NOT "mostly working" for a significant amount of modern usages.
Yes, if you happen to want to run your Terminal, Emacs, etc. remotely over a network connection, X11 is your huckleberry--but only because anything more complicated than a bitmap makes that a very difficult problem.
If you want HiDPI, subpixel anti-aliasing, color calibration, multiple resolutions on multiple displays, smooth video, no tearing, etc. X11 only works to a certain degree, some days, for some people, for some video cards. And it's not even clear how those should work over a network connection.
This is not new. After all, X11 critiques came in for a full chapter in the Unix Haters Handbook and that's 25 years old. Wayland is simply revisiting the same problems as X Server Extensions 30 years later (they aren't ubiquitous so nobody uses them so they aren't ubiquitous).
The problem is that people who use obscure features are VERY vocal about it while people who simply abandon your operating system because accelerated video doesn't work reliably are very quiet.
Maybe Wayland isn't the way forward, but X11 certainly hasn't been the way forward for decades.
The only advantage I can see is that if Wayland manages to tear out the X11-isms in everybody, what comes after Wayland will have a lot easier time of it.
Every single thing you've mentioned can be fixed with Xorg/X11.
(except subpixel antialiasing because that already existed for a long time, i'm not sure what you refer to)
Then why hasn't it been fixed?
In open source, those who make the code get to make the decisions--for better or for worse.
My personal opinion as to why X11 gets so few contributors--the build system is so terrible that nobody wants to touch it anymore. I suspect they would get a lot more contributors if they changed to something like meson/ninja which doesn't need to recompile the universe to be correct.
Are you referring to something else?
And I still see autogen.sh and Makefile.am goop in the top level of that repository.
However, I would be quite happy to be wrong.
I don't know, my guess is that people found making new stuff much more fun than fixing existing stuff.
Which is fine.
However that isn't the same as the existing stuff being unable to be fixed.
Cases in point: this project, https://github.com/const-me/Vrmac/ a non-trivial demo such as 3D teapot or 2D tiger.
Run that in desktop, and you’ll see occasional tearing.
Run the same demo on top of bare OS kernel (i.e. reboot to console), and it will work flawlessly on top of DRM/KMS, on the same Raspberry Pi4.
We had XV, RandR, antiaiasing and color managers with smooth video and no tearing since early 2000's. WTF are you talking about?
I've been using Wayland for years now and it works great. The one and only thing I use X for is OBS studio because they're still working out the window capture stuff, which BTW mean poking the right hole through security that X doesnt even have.
Most the things that don't work well on Wayland are old junk.
There is IIRC some chrome setting that fixes this, but it doesn’t help with chrome-based electron apps that don’t expose the internal settings (like Slack).
It took the X window system 30-ish years to get where it is today. Wayland only had 11 years, yet it is already better than X in many aspects.
I call systems like this CADT-compliant after Jamie Zawinski's Cascade of Attention-Deficit Teenagers idea.
Wayland is a system for which CADT-compliance (and maybe security) trumps nearly all other concerns. No surprise, the primary use case for Wayland is and was always GNOME -- the very system for which Zawinski coined CADT.
On Wayland I get excellent multi-monitor support (mixed scaling ratios, much better automatic detection and configuration, much better plug-and-play). I also have a touchpad on my XPS that feels just as good as a Mac.
To boot, I haven't had to touch a config file related to input devices or output devices a single time using Arch/GDE/Wayland.
Honestly, I'd probably still be running linux in a VM on my laptop if it weren't for Wayland.
If X is your opinion of "stable and working" then I don't want any part of your systems.
Dell Precision 7520 with an AMD GPU. The degree of flakiness is different depending on whether you're on Plasma or GNOME, but it's there nonetheless.
I switch between a station that has a 4k display next to a standard 1920x1080 display as well as my laptop display (3200x1800) and my home setup with the laptop and 2 4k displays.
I had an issue on the 4k displays when I attempted to run two displays and a usb hub on a single thunderbolt line, but that wasn't Wayland, that was me being dumb: The thunderbolt protocol only support 40Gb/s and each monitor uses 20Gb/s and the hub eats another 10Gb/s. If the hub got detected last, it dropped to usb 2, if one of the monitors came online last, it would drop to 30hz refresh rate. Frankly - I was a little floored when I realized that I was the one being dumb and the system was mostly still just making things work. Just for shits and giggles I booted up an x-session after to see what it does. The answer is lots of black screen.
Moreover: when I pass through the dGPU to a virtualized macOS, all monitors I plug in just work!
How does X work on that setup?
Mixed scaling? Is that that thing when you open chrome and it’s blurry on your hidpi monitor?
It's a painful first compile, but the only issues I've hit have been a few menus in the extension debugging screens that are too small.
Sure if someone wrote it in Rust it would be also safe and secure /s
It's like saying "Imagine if all the time you, a software engineer, spent on taking care of your child was spent on making a graphical server". Sure, but I don't want to make a graphical server, I want to turn people into dinosaurs.
We aren't talking about hobby work here.
I refuse.
1) the old, mostly working thing is being abandoned in favor of
2) that new thing which doesn't work in so many cases it's laughable, even after 11 years. How many years was it between the concept of X and a working release at Palo Alto?
Note that the new situation is so perfect for passing the buck from the windowing system to the compositors, and compositor folks are busy fighting feuds over which one another's private protocols or even public ones they are not going to support.
Oh, and the browsers. Chromium is making its first shy bumbling steps towards actually working on Wayland! A mere decade after!
I've heard it was so much easier to write Wayland clients, what could have happened?
Upd: This toxic development culture in a nutshell is exactly what this https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24165445 is about. Well, we know it's not limited to Google.