Why? What if Wayland and Mir have different goals? What if the venn-diagram overlap of those goals is less than ideal for Ubuntu and where it is going? Look at

Why? What if Wayland and Mir have different goals? What if the venn-diagram overlap of those goals is less than ideal for Ubuntu and where it is going? Look at the absolute MESS that compiz, x and other things in Linux have had b/c of the "support all the things" attitude. The simple FACT is that it is much easier to be exceedingly great at a small subset of things than a large super set of things. Mir is specific and exact to what Canonical wants and needs out of Ubuntu. Wayland is a GENERAL solution that, sure, Canonical could influence, but would ultimately need to be more than just what Canonical needs. That means, you guessed it, bugs, rough corners, things that aren't supported. It's called focus. Canonical is focusing on delivering an EXPERIENCE and they decided they could do it better in this approach. I agree with this b/c of 1. history 2. experience and 3. the current state of the various projects. And don't forget that the code is going to be open source. And I don't understand why this is a problem in the linux world when the web world this is typically encouraged as "the best project will win". Do we need Derby, Backbone, Meteor, Tower, Express, Knockout etc etc etc? What about Rails, Sinatra, Camping, Padrino? Django, Flask, Pyramid? Riak,Mongo,Couch? Why can't they all join forces and "contribute code and influence"? In the web world, this is kind of encouraged and seen as good for competition. In the linux world is it seen as "not being a good community member". It's fuckin' bullshit.