For me, the reason for sticking with X is that my X setup works, and whenever I look at what it'd take me to do the same things with Wayland, I balk. I really d

For me, the reason for sticking with X is that my X setup works, and whenever I look at what it'd take me to do the same things with Wayland, I balk. I really don't care about X. But as long as the migration would break any number of script I rely on, it's not worth it exactly because I care about how I spend my time. And that even drives me to write more X code because looking into whether I could realistically do the same upgrades to my environment with Wayland has put me off every time (I could write a tiny wm or be forced to maintain my own compositor - even the "tinywl" wlroots example is several times the size of my current wm, while not doing what I want). For me it is purely pragmatic. If/when it gets harder to keep my X setup running than migrating, I'll migrate, and I do what I can't to keep the X-specific parts of my code well isolated. But it's likely to take many years before migrating becomes easier than staying put at this rate - frankly, odds are what will make me migrate is if/when the browsers drop X support.