2 ms·
Compositors that don't support Wayland protocol extensions are in a tough spot. They are likely on the road to being seen as toy implementations for aforementio
by roenxi 3y ago
Compositors that don't support Wayland protocol extensions are in a tough spot. They are likely on the road to being seen as toy implementations for aforementioned reasons.
The de-facto Wayland standard is not going to be the core protocol, in the same way that the core X protocol is woefully insufficient [0] for actually running a modern linux system. It needs extensions. The core protocol just isn't featureful enough - as has been clearly demonstrated by a decade lost in the woods not supporting basic desktop functionality. If a design goal was to delay adoption by 10-15 years while they think about things then I suppose it could be considered a success. Other systems have managed to move much faster than that without doing much harm.
The sticking point is that at least the core X protocol didn't need a decade of R&D for a screenshot extension [1]. I suppose people could claim with a straight face that screenshots and streaming are unforeseen use cases, but they would be excellent poker players. It was a design mistake not to explicitly address that up front. An honest one, made by very competent people, but nevertheless a mis-step.
[0] https://wiki.gnome.org/GraphicsRequirements https://wiki.gnome.org/GraphicsRequirements
[1] I'll admit this is before my time - maybe it did? But the X protocol is a hot mess and Wayland is inching towards the point where it's release is closer to the birth of X windows than the present day.