3 ms·

The core of Wayland does seem to be pretty good, but I think adoption has been hurt by a tendency to push things out of the core protocol and the lack of a unif

The core of Wayland does seem to be pretty good, but I think adoption has been hurt by a tendency to push things out of the core protocol and the lack of a unified implementation between major desktop environments. Screenshots and screen capture got pushed out to dbus protocols and are quite limited in some ways compared to what you could do with X (good for sandboxing, but I think rather unfortunate for the non-sandboxed case). Window decorations are a huge mess because GNOME/Mutter don't support server side decorations at all, but non-GTK apps don't necessarily know how to draw their own. Even VRR support is kind of a mess because it's up to the individual compositors to implement it and one of the most commonly used ones (Mutter, used in GNOME) doesn't support it.

nsajko 3y ago
One of the big issues with Wayland is the (intentional) fragmentation. Each "Wayland compositor" is really its own window system, with its own peculiarities. This forces applications that would have been trivial to implement on X to either limit support to only a single "compositor", or suffer explosion of compositor-interfacing code. Apart from that, Wayland is very opinionated, it's basically intended to cater to 70% of users, while flipping off the rest.
kartoshechka 3y ago
the dumbest decision was to push keyboard layout handling to compositor, and if you happen to be multilingual, you're locked into mainstream DEs. while all the cool stuff like newm, cardboard, hikari is destined to avoid any meaningful adoption unless authors reinvent a monstrous wheel that is keyboard layouts