3 ms·
"now supported." to me means you can actually use it so this seemed to be talking about the implementations. I guess you were using it in the theoretically supp
by superkuh 3y ago
"now supported." to me means you can actually use it so this seemed to be talking about the implementations. I guess you were using it in the theoretically supported sense? Anyway, it's hardly an official spec (like X.org is for X11s) when the implementations pick and chose.
- sho_hn 3y agoIt's as official as, say, the HTML 5 spec, or the HTTP spec. The implementations can be plenty different as long as they conform. It's not that I'm not getting your point. But part of the reason I wrote this rant is better than others, is because it's not harping on the point of "omg! someone dared to write a standard that has multiple implementations! the audacity!", but instead has criticisms of the standard itself. I understand you don't like the standard-and-multiple-impls model, but it's worth noting that the most popular Wayland implementations share plenty of auxiliary and utility code in the form of libraries (e.g. libinput, libdisplay-info, etc). It's not as fragmented as it may seem, people are pretty reasonable. Personally I think this is a healthy way to run things, for example because changes to the standard can easily be validated in multiple implementations, which tends to promote better quality for all over time.