3 ms·
The core protocol is minimal because it considers not only PCs and laptops as a target, but also smartphones and tablets (where supporting xdg-shell is usually
by majewsky 4y ago
The core protocol is minimal because it considers not only PCs and laptops as a target, but also smartphones and tablets (where supporting xdg-shell is usually not desired because it breaks the UI paradigm), IoT and embedded usecases. In particular, IVI (in-vehicle infotainment) was a hot area that every hardware vendor was trying to get into at the time (around 2010), including companies like Intel that contributed to the Wayland spec.
Source: I was active in KDE development around the time when the Wayland core protocol was defined, and followed the discussions on the side lines.
- iforgotpassword 4y agoThen there should have been a set of core protocols, so for example, something like core-desktop. Going for the bare minimum just to be super flexible and support desktops, phones, tablets, fridges and graphics cards with RGB lighting is the typical overthinking that hurts everyone and slows adoption. Wayland was conceived in 2008, and has had paid full time devs working on it. For that, the current state is pretty pathetic.
- ahartmetz 4y agoThe xdg-shell protocol is a sort of core desktop protocol. It has an opinion about everyone's favorite Wayland topic (server-side decorations), and if you have a different opinion, you need to use the xdg-decoration-unstable-v1 (as it still seems to be called) protocol. Fortunately, it seems like the Wayland desktop scene is converging on that one now. There are still some missing pieces, but the situation isn't disastrous anymore.