This again feels like someone is confusing X11, the implementation, with X, the protocol, and makes an analogous inference that there is a single Wayland refere

This again feels like someone is confusing X11, the implementation, with X, the protocol, and makes an analogous inference that there is a single Wayland reference implementation and that everything Wayland is Wayland11, when what's really happening is that he chose a specific compositor, and the compositor just happens to implement Wayland. The idea of a second implementation doesn't exist with X and this leads to a culture shock. Each compositor is equivalent to an independent X11 implementation. This means most of the Wayland problems have nothing to do with Wayland and more to do with the immaturity of competing implementations. It's akin to blaming the HTTP protocol for YouTube changing the design again. The primary complaint seems to be that compositors are struggling to catch up with all the new portals that are being created to support features outside of displaying window contents. You'd have thought that this is a good thing. It means you're being listened to. There is a reason for the negativity though and the reason people are complaining is that they were taking X11 maintenance for granted, which had concentrated every single complaint we are hearing now into a single code base. Now that there are multiple competing compositors the free lunch is over.