3 ms·
Fedora 25: Wayland vs. Xorg
- digi_owl 10y ago> And you see, that's part of the problem. Stuff should not be designed to be easier to developer or maintain. That can be a beneficial by-product provided all other customer requirements are met. But if they are not, then it does not matter how hard or simple it is for programmers to hammer code. That's their job. The whole purpose of technology is to support the end state - in this case, a seamless and smooth user experience. Sadly that horse is long gone. After the XFree86 fork Xorg decided to split the X11 code into 1001 sub-projects. Yes, it had some benefits, like being able to add/replace drivers without compiling the whole of X11. But one benefit from the XFree86 "monolith" was that one could do configure and compile dance once, and get a working X11. Now i have to find just the right piece of everything to get it compiled. And if i complain about it i am likely to be told that i should not compile it myself but use one of the major precompiled distros. Never mind that with the move to DRI/DRM if there is too large a mismatch between kernel and X11 driver the kernel panics. Frankly the whole Wayland vs X11 thing is a distraction. The real problem is that the DEs, Gnome in particular, has gotten too much say in what happens to the lower layers. And all in the name of eyecandy and "UX". Build something stable and they will come. Polish a turd and they will smell the stink and stay far far away.