46 ms·

I think its' quite common to believe that a rewrite will be wonderful and then find out that it has its own problems. The big problems are the social ones - I

by t43562 3y ago

I think its' quite common to believe that a rewrite will be wonderful and then find out that it has its own problems. The big problems are the social ones - I think the author is correct that allowing fragmentation is a big big mistake that cannot be recovered from and wastes everyone's time. I'm also concerned about the "justify your usecase" issues. I know why people like to say that kind of thing when they have a philosophy that they don't want to toss out but to me it's never been a way to win people over to working on your system. Usually one cannot understand every single use case or at least understand how important it is to the people who want it. Making life difficult for others is not a recipe for success.

jauntywundrkind 3y ago
Short term inefficienty over debating over protocols is an obvious woe. But it's corresponding long term gains over protocols being far better threshed out, debated, and revised over time is basically invisible except by conjecture and at much grander time-scales. Your comment here actually feels like what Wayland is good at: creating a development model where concerns & priorities can organically emerge, versus the anti-fragmentation model where there is one and only one canonical protocol or implementation: > Usually one cannot understand every single use case or at least understand how important it is to the people who want it. Compare versus what came before too. X dead ended itself in a lot of ways. The decentralized model seems to be working pretty well, albeit many people disagree, and many expected a faster more seamless changeover, and hang this albatross of expectations around Wayland's neck. Most users will never care, but Wayland seems to be remarkably implementable. People kick out fun random idea implemntatjons with surprising regularity. This starting light seems like a huge win, to me, that enables a lot more ecosystem innovation that alternatives. You're just managing some OS DRM object buffers, via some protocols? Simple, nice. And then the other concerns later on, ok. This is a good gradient to me, and one that promoted a systems diversity health, that feeds forward, brilliantly. Being small & targeted & organically growing other layers keeps seeming like a huge win.
- t43562 3y ago
  It's useless to me as I cannot share teams desktops (at least the last time I tried). Game over totally. The idea that it's fun for some developers because they get to try things is of no use to users like me. I also question that fun if people are trying to get important features out and cannot because someone doesn't accept the use case.
  - jauntywundrkind 3y ago
    Everyone has their one straw that just makes it totally unacceptable to them. And >50% of these straws seem to be that their ultra proprietary standard is a boatanchor against progress & isn't doing the good nice thing everyone in hopeful open source world has been doing for half a decade. If you are going to doom & give up on Wayland or any idea because it's not popular enough, because it hasn't hit a critical overwhelming mass of support where the slow beleaguered giant corporations don't all support it, progress is impossible. We'll never meet your bar, change is impossible, & we shouldn't ever try doing anything but what we already did.
    - t43562 3y ago
      It has been around a long time and isn't usable for me - why should I expect it to suddenly change?

by t43562 3y ago

jauntywundrkind 3y ago

Short term inefficienty over debating over protocols is an obvious woe. But it's corresponding long term gains over protocols being far better threshed out, debated, and revised over time is basically invisible except by conjecture and at much grander time-scales. Your comment here actually feels like what Wayland is good at: creating a development model where concerns & priorities can organically emerge, versus the anti-fragmentation model where there is one and only one canonical protocol or implementation: > Usually one cannot understand every single use case or at least understand how important it is to the people who want it. Compare versus what came before too. X dead ended itself in a lot of ways. The decentralized model seems to be working pretty well, albeit many people disagree, and many expected a faster more seamless changeover, and hang this albatross of expectations around Wayland's neck. Most users will never care, but Wayland seems to be remarkably implementable. People kick out fun random idea implemntatjons with surprising regularity. This starting light seems like a huge win, to me, that enables a lot more ecosystem innovation that alternatives. You're just managing some OS DRM object buffers, via some protocols? Simple, nice. And then the other concerns later on, ok. This is a good gradient to me, and one that promoted a systems diversity health, that feeds forward, brilliantly. Being small & targeted & organically growing other layers keeps seeming like a huge win.

t43562 3y ago
It's useless to me as I cannot share teams desktops (at least the last time I tried). Game over totally. The idea that it's fun for some developers because they get to try things is of no use to users like me. I also question that fun if people are trying to get important features out and cannot because someone doesn't accept the use case.
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  Everyone has their one straw that just makes it totally unacceptable to them. And >50% of these straws seem to be that their ultra proprietary standard is a boatanchor against progress & isn't doing the good nice thing everyone in hopeful open source world has been doing for half a decade. If you are going to doom & give up on Wayland or any idea because it's not popular enough, because it hasn't hit a critical overwhelming mass of support where the slow beleaguered giant corporations don't all support it, progress is impossible. We'll never meet your bar, change is impossible, & we shouldn't ever try doing anything but what we already did.
  - t43562 3y ago
    It has been around a long time and isn't usable for me - why should I expect it to suddenly change?