3 ms·

It makes a huge amount of sense to control what programs can snoop on each other. There won't be a lot of people against the idea in principle. Eventually the W

by roenxi 2y ago

It makes a huge amount of sense to control what programs can snoop on each other. There won't be a lot of people against the idea in principle. Eventually the Wayland ecosystem will be strictly better than X because at least there is some amount of control over that sort of thing. The problem that Wayland had is it took the stance of "just no!" and that means Wayland is now almost an adult (15 years, so a little time to go) and only just arrived at a place where a Wayland compositor is about as useable as an X11 based system (thanks Pipewire). Wayland has been a mess for so long I think even in Debian Bullseye swaywm didn't support Zoom (or any other program) screensharing. Which for 2022 was a remarkable gap in capability. I'm all aboard for the Wayland transition because it is a definite improvement, but Wayland's "security" debacle is a legendary case study in design gone wrong.

rcxdude 2y ago
It's not just security, there's a bit of an over-obsession with generalised future-proofing: useful optional proposed protocols have been shot down because they 'assume windows will be laid out on a screen with xy coordinates'. It's a recipe for committee bikeshedding to run rampant, especially with multiple very opinionated parties involved, any of which can torpedo even an 'accepted' extension by just not implementing it. It's a nightmare of fragmentation.