It's simple and slim, and therefore hopefully more performant.
And then there was some drama about client side windows decorations, that I didn't quite get.
It is a personal choice. And Wayland the windowing system doesn't care what you do - its decoration agnostic.
Most of the core Wayland team believes that client-side decorations is the technically superior approach for efficiency and accuracy reasons, and we're disappointed KDE is still pushing for server-side decorations.
There is currently no protocol to negotiate between the toolkit and compositor whether to use client-side or server-side decorations. And I can't see one being added in the near future, either.
So I don't know much about the wayland architecture outside of the docs and Daniel Stone's linux.conf.au talk on it. It seemed like a clean and smart replacement to what X has become, after using it for a while have you run into any serious limitations or is everything still going along smoothly?
I've poked my head in a few times, but is there anywhere good to keep up on progress other than the mailing lists?
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/wayland/weston/tree/src/composit...
Really, a big part of Wayland is that there isn't much there. It's not a ridiculously complicated system to explain with lots of extensions, you're just having clients pass image files around and get streams of messages for input. The easiest way to get a feel for the system is to use the built-in protocol dumper:
... or so... and that's it, that's the entire system.If anybody has any more questions on Wayland internals, I'll certainly consider writing a series of articles on it.