From the linux-on-the-desktop perspective, I have the impression there are 2 major groups today: Red hat, going all in on both gnome and wayland, or most other

From the linux-on-the-desktop perspective, I have the impression there are 2 major groups today: Red hat, going all in on both gnome and wayland, or most others on X11. So gnome having an objection to these basically means wayland does not have them. All the other wayland clients together are mostly background noise. Stated from a programmer perspective, what I can count on being available. What is the baseline? Desktop linux is a mess compared to windows or OSX, with gnome/KDE as major frameworks, and a ton of minor but still relevant frameworks. The one thing they have in common, the one thing that makes GUI applications work more or less together is X11. Wayland causes a split here: yet another painfull technology reset that will probably cost us a decade before everyone has migrated. Now if wayland itself is fractured between its major player and everybody else, there is a 3-way split. It seems X11 will die, Gnome as 800 pound gorilla will dictate the technological baseline, hence end users will lose basic functionality after suffering trough wayland's maturisation. I can understand your frustration. You've probably built something great, X11 seems a dead end, and I presume you can't do much about Gnome. But I'll either have to live with this mess or run back to windows. I've dealt with pulseaudio and systemd, and both were arrogant low-quality projects that took years to stabilize back to their original levels. I can live without beeps on my desktop for a week, or the occasional service weirding out. I can't live with a usable UI. Maybe you deal with climate change conservatives by demonstrating they still can get their groceries without their CO2 spewing SUV.