Ask HN: Why the Hate Toward XLibre?
1. Within the last week or so the XLibre project was forked from Xorg/X11 with the goal of maintaining and improving this stack.
2. The person who created the fork had been banned/censored by RedHad/X.org for... well, I'm not sure.
3. The person who created the fork was not a fan of the COVID vax and was called out on LKML by Linus Torvalds about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44200997
Questions:
1. Is there something about forking/continuing XLibre that is so bad?
2. Is there something about Wayland that is so necessary to Linux now and in the future that anyone supporting a deprecated stack -- and attracting others to do the same -- is a massive threat?
I don't use Linux on the desktop (because I need certain products from Adobe and Photo Mechanic for my side job) so I don't understand why there is such a visceral reaction to XLibre. Can y'all help me understand why?
Instead, we get pageful of whining about how bad bad big tech pissed on authors cornflakes. Hate? I don't see any reason to hate the guy. But I also don't see a single bit of reason to take him seriously.
We can argue whether their contributions were a net positive to the upstream project, and I'm aware that they were criticized for breaking the build on `master` more than once, but this doesn't explain the ban. Under these circumstances, forking is a sane choice if the developer plans to continue working on it.
With the recent news that GNOME and Ubuntu will be dropping support for Xorg in upcoming releases, I think it's great that someone is at least motivated to continue improving Xorg. All Linux users shouldn't be forced to use Wayland. This is similar to the forced systemd adoption we went through a few years ago.
[1]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/work_items/182...
(My source on what I wrote are a couple videos by Lunduke.)
Responses to your questions: 1. no - anyone can fork anything that's FOSS at any time, license permitting, to do with as they please. Anyone telling them they can't is a draconian overlord who disregards the opensource ethos (and quite possibly violates licensing). Oh wait, we're talking about Red Hat here. Of course. 2. no, except that it's yet another "poke in the eye" towards Wayland fans who continue to tell everyone how much better than X11 it is. Perhaps it is for them - it's not for me, and plenty others, from what I've read, but people tend to get emotionally attached to their creations. The fact that someone wants to fork and support it means that they have to recognize that Wayland isn't going to sweep X11 under the carpet, that it _doesn't_, in fact, provide an all-round better solution, that all things suck in their own special way, with Wayland having issues for certain users and workloads, and X11 being rock-solid, but architected in a way that means that applications don't have to run and be rendered on the same machine (yes, you can run a graphical app over ssh if there's X11 involved at both ends - it will display locally, run remotely.
So to me, the backlash is just people who are sore that their precious Wayland will have more competition, and that it's likely to be adopted over Wayland if it maintains proper compatibility as well as receiving improvements. It's not a good look for anyone involved.