4 ms·

But they are still maintaining it. Also, the improvements that Wayland brings are not really specific to them, because they are mostly due to a new Linux kernel

• bitwize 5y ago
  > But they are still maintaining it. Only just barely. And they told us it could stop at any time. All the developer energy and support is behind Wayland, so that's what you should be using. > I don't really see the point of Wayland, to me X was just fine, sure, maybe it was time for X12, but was a completely new display server needed? The developers closest to the graphics stack say yes, so I defer to their expertise. Really, this has been discussed to death many, many times. The arguments for X (or an X-like architecture) invariably come from people who are ignorant of the actual issues involved. Here's a video by Daniel Stone that addresses the main points; note that it was made 8 years ago and people are still arguing the points: https://youtu.be/RIctzAQOe44 https://youtu.be/RIctzAQOe44 As far as the graphics stack maintainers are concerned the debate is pretty much over, and Wayland won. X will get little to no developer attention going forward. Unless you want to take responsibility for the X server, your choices are to get with the program and get on Wayland, or find your use case completely unsupported. (Note that when it comes to large projects like Xorg, corporate sponsorship is critical. The corporations are putting their money behind Wayland, not X.)