2 ms·

X has what, 40 years of history - it's battle-tested to hell and back, and knows all the corner cases. Wayland is much younger and a full rewrite, inevitably it

by toyg 5y ago

X has what, 40 years of history - it's battle-tested to hell and back, and knows all the corner cases. Wayland is much younger and a full rewrite, inevitably it will have issues for years and years. Part of the push is so that these cases emerge. Wayland is probably easier for developers to work with - the X codebase by now is ancient. But it will lack some functionality that X has, probably forever.

simion314 5y ago
>Wayland is much younger and a full rewrite Isn't more like Wayland is just some protocols + some testing code, and all DEs use their own implementation, So is like Wayland is like at least 3 different rewrites. Also I just read someone argument that X devs are coding wayland, how the fuck are they coding a protocol? or are they working on GNOME implementation since RedHat == GNOME. I would also abandon an old code base and just write some protocols for 10% of the old code features and then let the suckers implement it.