6 ms·
> The fact that Wayland’s minimal core protocol made it unable to fully replace the thing it aimed to replace was a bad architectural design decision on the par
by colordrops 3y ago
> The fact that Wayland’s minimal core protocol made it unable to fully replace the thing it aimed to replace was a bad architectural design decision on the part of its authors that crippled the prospect of its rapid adoption when it was released in 2008.
Maybe I missed it in the article, but what was this decision?
- boomboomsubban 3y agoThe decision to leave basic necessities to the compositor, it's discussed in the "How is Wayland any better?" and "Wait, that sounds like it sucks" sections.
- XorNot 3y agoThat section seemed light on details of what was missing though.
- boomboomsubban 3y ago>Wayland’s minimal core protocols are lacking most of the features that non-trivial apps and desktops actually need to work–such as screen locking, screen sharing, cross-app window activation, non-integer scaling, and so on. Seems enough to show why it's a contentious decision.
- DistractionRect 3y agoThat'd end up being a longish explanation of what wlroots is, and I think that'd detract from the post. Noting the vacuum exists and linking to the emergent library that filled is sufficient, and gives the curious reader something they can follow up on.
- mixmastamyk 3y agoThe subject is well documented by now.