5 ms·
> while throwing backwards compatibility out of the window for no apparent reason on a regular basis. They are pure garbage to such an extent that they appear t
by destructionator 5y ago
> while throwing backwards compatibility out of the window for no apparent reason on a regular basis. They are pure garbage to such an extent that they appear to be deliberate sabotage.
This is exactly how I feel about Wayland. It is gratuitously incompatible and its proponents regularly lie about X to push it. Makes me think they want to give desktop Linux a finishing blow.
- md8z 5y agoI'm not sure who you are referring to when you say "proponents", Wayland and X are mostly being developed by the same people. I don't see why they would lie about their own software. Also, if you look into it, you'll find everything that was redesigned in Wayland and broke backwards compatibility was done for a reason.
- AshamedCaptain 5y agoIt is always your own software the one you want to rewrite, because "the second time you'll get it right".
- md8z 5y agoWell, I think Wayland is going to avoid the "second-system effect" as it was intentionally designed to be smaller and less grandiose than X. http://catb.org/jargon/html/S/second-system-effect.html http://catb.org/jargon/html/S/second-system-effect.html
- destructionator 5y agoBut the reality is those features were added to the first thing for reasons. Which means there's user pressure to add them again... which means the second system effect is virtually impossible to avoid. See for yourself: https://wayland.app/protocols/ https://wayland.app/protocols/ And unlike the first system, it doesn't have the experience of use to refine it.