> Another way to put it is Wayland with a few years of development by a few Linux players (others were building alternatives, while yet others were seeing which

> Another way to put it is Wayland with a few years of development by a few Linux players (others were building alternatives, while yet others were seeing which one would win out, and yet others were hoping to stay on X11 forever) under its belt, is almost as solid as X11 with many decades of development by all the Linux players. If Wayland is going to be caught up and have feature parity so soon, then why can't decisions to deprecate and remove X11 be 100% put on hold until then? > The idea that X11 was a completely working option which had every capability it does today within years of its inception is wrong. Nobody thinks that. But at the time X11 was missing all of those important features, there wasn't another full-featured option that everyone was rushing to deprecate and remove support for to force everyone onto the immature and incomplete X11, at the expense of things that already worked.