3 ms·

So build on top of wlroots or something. DWL for example is super small...

by dismalaf 10mo ago

ggdG 10mo ago
Current status: > 2025-08-16: dwl IS CURRENTLY UN-MAINTAINED. AT THE PRESENT TIME, I (@fauxmight) DO NOT HAVE THE TIME OR CAPACITY TO KEEP UP WITH wlroots CHANGES. https://codeberg.org/dwl/dwl https://codeberg.org/dwl/dwl
- dismalaf 10mo ago
  I said build on top of wlroots, not DWL. And I only brought it up as an example of a small Wayland compositor/window manager because the poster I was replying to wants to build their own anyway. DWL is more interesting as a learning exercise than something to use.
  - badsectoracula 10mo ago
    The -IMO- important part of that quote is "NOT HAVE THE TIME OR CAPACITY TO KEEP UP WITH wlroots CHANGES". X11 is backwards compatible, you do not have to "keep up" with its changes. wlroots seemingly isn't. This is a significant issue when it comes to relying on most 3rd party libraries.
    - mackeye 10mo ago
      (i worked a _little bit_ on dwl) each wlroots upgrade is a pretty small diff on the dwl source. the annoying part is, as dwl is configured with patches, every patch author has to update their patch to the new 0.x, as dwl is quite minimal, and thus has no stable api. that being said, obviously, dwm doesn't have this problem :) also, for dwl, the issue is that the initial author (not the guy that wrote that notice) is sorta mia, and he has control of the repo on codeberg, so we'd probably need to fork to be safe, and he may not want to take on project lead. (he checks every patch for merge conflicts with one another and upgrade breakages, god bless him lol)
    - gf000 10mo ago
      > X11 is backwards compatible, you do not have to "keep up" with its changes. That's certainly one way to say "no longer developed".
      - int_19h 10mo ago
        That was also true back when it was actively developed though. X apps compiled a long time ago still run fine today.
      - badsectoracula 10mo ago
        Xorg is still being under development, there is another fork in development too (XLibre) and you're in the comment thread for a project about a brand new X server written from scratch. Usually things which are "no longer developed" do not have (at least) three implementations in development.
      - michaelmrose 10mo ago
        Mature projects often don't change much or quickly even when actively maintained or improved.
      - account42 10mo ago
        When things work further development is not always a positive.
  - ggdG 10mo ago
    > I said build on top of wlroots, not DWL. Turns out, the wlroots API is so volatile atm that even the developer of the super small compositor DWL has to throw in the towel for now. > DWL is more interesting as a learning exercise than something to use. The same is said about DWM, its xorg counterpart, but I, for one, am a happy user of DWM.
    - dismalaf 10mo ago
      Nearly every Wayland compositor is built on wlroots. Somehow they manage. But yeah, of course it's going to change more than X11, which is older than I am and more or less abandoned...
      - michaelmrose 10mo ago
        It's actively maintained by projects like RHEL which still have versions which are supported which in turn support X11. Others are looking to run X11 wm under wayland with wayback, xlibre wants to keep it moving forward, and phoenix wants to replace it with a modern version. This isn't what abandoned means.
  - vidarh 10mo ago
    No, I do not. I pointed out that with Wayland I'd be forced to. And DWL is an illustration of how much work that is relative to an X11 wm.
vidarh 10mo ago
Why would I? And DWL is not super small. It's hundreds of times larger than a minimal X wm, and couple of times as big as the wm I used. And it's C. And it'd mean I would lose my session if I want to make changes and restart it. What you're suggesting would be to put significant effort into replacing something that works with something that in terms of features I care about is strictly inferior.

So build on top of wlroots or something. DWL for example is super small...

ggdG 10mo ago

Current status: > 2025-08-16: dwl IS CURRENTLY UN-MAINTAINED. AT THE PRESENT TIME, I (@fauxmight) DO NOT HAVE THE TIME OR CAPACITY TO KEEP UP WITH wlroots CHANGES. https://codeberg.org/dwl/dwl https://codeberg.org/dwl/dwl

dismalaf 10mo ago
I said build on top of wlroots, not DWL. And I only brought it up as an example of a small Wayland compositor/window manager because the poster I was replying to wants to build their own anyway. DWL is more interesting as a learning exercise than something to use.
- badsectoracula 10mo ago
  The -IMO- important part of that quote is "NOT HAVE THE TIME OR CAPACITY TO KEEP UP WITH wlroots CHANGES". X11 is backwards compatible, you do not have to "keep up" with its changes. wlroots seemingly isn't. This is a significant issue when it comes to relying on most 3rd party libraries.
  - mackeye 10mo ago
    (i worked a _little bit_ on dwl) each wlroots upgrade is a pretty small diff on the dwl source. the annoying part is, as dwl is configured with patches, every patch author has to update their patch to the new 0.x, as dwl is quite minimal, and thus has no stable api. that being said, obviously, dwm doesn't have this problem :) also, for dwl, the issue is that the initial author (not the guy that wrote that notice) is sorta mia, and he has control of the repo on codeberg, so we'd probably need to fork to be safe, and he may not want to take on project lead. (he checks every patch for merge conflicts with one another and upgrade breakages, god bless him lol)
  - gf000 10mo ago
    > X11 is backwards compatible, you do not have to "keep up" with its changes. That's certainly one way to say "no longer developed".
    - int_19h 10mo ago
      That was also true back when it was actively developed though. X apps compiled a long time ago still run fine today.
    - badsectoracula 10mo ago
      Xorg is still being under development, there is another fork in development too (XLibre) and you're in the comment thread for a project about a brand new X server written from scratch. Usually things which are "no longer developed" do not have (at least) three implementations in development.
    - michaelmrose 10mo ago
      Mature projects often don't change much or quickly even when actively maintained or improved.
    - account42 10mo ago
      When things work further development is not always a positive.
- ggdG 10mo ago
  > I said build on top of wlroots, not DWL. Turns out, the wlroots API is so volatile atm that even the developer of the super small compositor DWL has to throw in the towel for now. > DWL is more interesting as a learning exercise than something to use. The same is said about DWM, its xorg counterpart, but I, for one, am a happy user of DWM.
  - dismalaf 10mo ago
    Nearly every Wayland compositor is built on wlroots. Somehow they manage. But yeah, of course it's going to change more than X11, which is older than I am and more or less abandoned...
    - michaelmrose 10mo ago
      It's actively maintained by projects like RHEL which still have versions which are supported which in turn support X11. Others are looking to run X11 wm under wayland with wayback, xlibre wants to keep it moving forward, and phoenix wants to replace it with a modern version. This isn't what abandoned means.
- vidarh 10mo ago
  No, I do not. I pointed out that with Wayland I'd be forced to. And DWL is an illustration of how much work that is relative to an X11 wm.

vidarh 10mo ago

Why would I? And DWL is not super small. It's hundreds of times larger than a minimal X wm, and couple of times as big as the wm I used. And it's C. And it'd mean I would lose my session if I want to make changes and restart it. What you're suggesting would be to put significant effort into replacing something that works with something that in terms of features I care about is strictly inferior.