Wayland exists because it was proposed with concrete reasons why X was rubbish and needed replaced. So everyone said "yes, true, valid, you speak honestly here

Wayland exists because it was proposed with concrete reasons why X was rubbish and needed replaced. So everyone said "yes, true, valid, you speak honestly here" and they proceeded to develop Wayland and everyone was on board with transitioning to it when it was ready. Mir has never produced any arguments for its adoption and has only spread false information claiming why it has merits over Wayland. Free software will usually jump on any software that can clearly state "this replaces X, for reasons Y, because X is insufficient for purpose in these domains Z and can't be fixed". You get situations where projects like pulse and systemd come under fire over disagreements over what Z domains X is appropriate for, not because there are arguments against Y being lacking functionality.