3 ms·

The protocol is trivially extensible, and have had plenty of extensions that has significant altered how it behaves. Fixing X in a step wise manner wod have bee

by vidarh 1y ago

The protocol is trivially extensible, and have had plenty of extensions that has significant altered how it behaves. Fixing X in a step wise manner wod have been perfectly doable. The problem is that the Wayland proponents didn't just want to fix the things there was agreement was broken, but also wanted to actively break things that would cause an uproar.

const_cast 1y ago
But we did do exactly that with X for literal decades. Then the developers of Xorg said "fuck this". I mean, where does the bus stop?
- vidarh 1y ago
  For literal decades they proved how malleable the protocol is, yes. Then they decided to ignore how malleable the protocol is instead of even trying to e.g. start by deprecating obsolete functionality and disabling it in future versions. When XRender was introduced, for example, was the perfect time to deprecate server-side font-rendering. It's trivial to shim on the client side if anyone cared about the legacy functionality, and it takes a trivial amount of code to switch to using XRender instead for it instead (been there, done that, written a font renderer). There's been plenty of opportunities to gut the legacy parts of the protocol that way, and reduce the complexity. Grouping the main set of extensions and declaring that if the server reports a certain version number or above they
- LightHugger 1y ago
  This didn't happen because redhat/ibm/microsoft took control of the project and decided they wanted to kill it. They have said this directly on social media that this is their explicit goal so it's not as if this is a conspiracy of some sort, it's just their publicly stated goal. They then deliberately stopped merging changes and left it to rot until the contributors got frustrated enough to fork it. Now a massive gamergate-esque coordinated character assassination campaign against the creator of xlibre is ongoing even from publications that have many previous articles praising the same contributor at length. Corporate control of open source is very dangerous to the ecosystem as they also fund the "journalists" writing these articles who are willing to defend every decision they make.
  - vidarh 1y ago
    Oh, please. As someone who wants a project like Xlibre, even just the project README alone is sufficient to taint the project.
  - ChocolateGod 1y ago
    Why would Microsoft want to kill X? It kept back the Linux desktop. > Now a massive gamergate-esque coordinated character assassination campaign against the creator of xlibre is ongoing even from publications that have many previous articles praising the same contributor at length Half the drama is the Xlibre guy involving politics
    - holowoodman 1y ago
      > Why would Microsoft want to kill X? It kept back the Linux desktop. Well, we'll see what "progress" Wayland will bring. Maybe in another 15 years, when it might be halfway "done"...
    - LightHugger 1y ago
      the xlibre guy said "no dei" in a fork that is separating from a company embroiled in racist discrimination lawsuits for using DEI to hurt real people. Is that really involving politics? In a way it is, sure, but again, unlike red hat, IBM and friends, he has pledged not to discriminate against contributors on the basis of politics. Red hat and IBM openly continue to discriminate against contributors and employees on not only the basis of politics but skin color as well. They wield their CoC like a cudgel to get rid of anyone they don't like with no semblance of fair enforcement. It's a series of struggle sessions, man. So, if you're accusing him of being political, but you're not accusing red hat of being political, you're probably not really accusing him of being political, you're probably just either woefully misinformed or outright racist. Can you explain why you think someone who pledges not to discriminate against people for politics (while forking from a corp that does, it's not just a random comment, it's part of the reason a fork is needed) is more political than a company that actively discriminates against people for politics and also their skin color?
      - 1y ago

by vidarh 1y ago

const_cast 1y ago

But we did do exactly that with X for literal decades. Then the developers of Xorg said "fuck this". I mean, where does the bus stop?

vidarh 1y ago
For literal decades they proved how malleable the protocol is, yes. Then they decided to ignore how malleable the protocol is instead of even trying to e.g. start by deprecating obsolete functionality and disabling it in future versions. When XRender was introduced, for example, was the perfect time to deprecate server-side font-rendering. It's trivial to shim on the client side if anyone cared about the legacy functionality, and it takes a trivial amount of code to switch to using XRender instead for it instead (been there, done that, written a font renderer). There's been plenty of opportunities to gut the legacy parts of the protocol that way, and reduce the complexity. Grouping the main set of extensions and declaring that if the server reports a certain version number or above they
LightHugger 1y ago
This didn't happen because redhat/ibm/microsoft took control of the project and decided they wanted to kill it. They have said this directly on social media that this is their explicit goal so it's not as if this is a conspiracy of some sort, it's just their publicly stated goal. They then deliberately stopped merging changes and left it to rot until the contributors got frustrated enough to fork it. Now a massive gamergate-esque coordinated character assassination campaign against the creator of xlibre is ongoing even from publications that have many previous articles praising the same contributor at length. Corporate control of open source is very dangerous to the ecosystem as they also fund the "journalists" writing these articles who are willing to defend every decision they make.
- vidarh 1y ago
  Oh, please. As someone who wants a project like Xlibre, even just the project README alone is sufficient to taint the project.
- ChocolateGod 1y ago
  Why would Microsoft want to kill X? It kept back the Linux desktop. > Now a massive gamergate-esque coordinated character assassination campaign against the creator of xlibre is ongoing even from publications that have many previous articles praising the same contributor at length Half the drama is the Xlibre guy involving politics
  - holowoodman 1y ago
    > Why would Microsoft want to kill X? It kept back the Linux desktop. Well, we'll see what "progress" Wayland will bring. Maybe in another 15 years, when it might be halfway "done"...
  - LightHugger 1y ago
    the xlibre guy said "no dei" in a fork that is separating from a company embroiled in racist discrimination lawsuits for using DEI to hurt real people. Is that really involving politics? In a way it is, sure, but again, unlike red hat, IBM and friends, he has pledged not to discriminate against contributors on the basis of politics. Red hat and IBM openly continue to discriminate against contributors and employees on not only the basis of politics but skin color as well. They wield their CoC like a cudgel to get rid of anyone they don't like with no semblance of fair enforcement. It's a series of struggle sessions, man. So, if you're accusing him of being political, but you're not accusing red hat of being political, you're probably not really accusing him of being political, you're probably just either woefully misinformed or outright racist. Can you explain why you think someone who pledges not to discriminate against people for politics (while forking from a corp that does, it's not just a random comment, it's part of the reason a fork is needed) is more political than a company that actively discriminates against people for politics and also their skin color?
    - 1y ago