If anything that gives Wayland even more weight as the replacement for Xorg.
I get that no law requires them to "be nice," but we should definitely talk about it regardless.
How many of Wayland haters have put the effort to make them happen?
KDrive gave me a TLS error (the certificate is misconfigured) but ignoring it brings me to a web page that states the information is obsolete and hasn't been updated in about 7 years according to the page info. Everybody online talks about KDrive in the past tense it seems.
Y-windows.org works, but the homepage only shows two entries written in 2004. It seems to be the product of a thesis that never received any development.
I think it's safe to say from the listed post, only Wayland survived. I think of all the other alternatives, Mir had the best change at succeeding, but that died half a decade ago.
I really hope Arcan takes off; it's a much more elegant system than Wayland's XML-based crap whose main defense is "just use a toolkit!".
> Wayland's XML-based crap
What is that? Do you mean the protocol definition? Why is that a big issue?
Apparently, Mir is still being actively developed at Canonical, but with focus towards embedded systems. The original plan had been to base it on libraries borrowed from Android, but those have been replaced with parts of Wayland. It looks as if it can also be hosted on top of Wayland or X11.
Official site: https://mir-server.io/
Shutting up and using Wayland is the sensible thing to do.
So one either shuts up and accepts that the X developers know what they are doing, or comes up with an alternative that beats Wayland.
E.g. I can criticize a restaurant or a government or a building development.
None of these requires that I start my own restaurant, government, or building development.
Or accept what exists and that is it.
I'm going to go with e.g. the framers of the Constitution and others who actually think this is a good thing.
If it were for anti-Wayland people mindset, nothing would have changed, they would only complain about it on newspaper readers section.
If we reconsider your "criticize a restaurant" analogy, we are not random folks walking into a restaurant. We are professional chefs criticizing the output of other professional chefs.
In that context, "go start your own restaurant" does actually make sense.
One of the worst things in computing is this sort of gatekeeping; it's not only "professional chefs" here, it's people who want to democratize more of software building, not reintroduce more silos.
A great deal of the things we use were at one time someone or some group wanting something the status quo wasn't providing.
By openly talking about it with your community, which includes people who may not be the builders.
The pro-Wayland folks appear to believe that this -- talking about and being critical of software that a lot of people may use -- is a bad thing.
Criticizing Wayland is great if you do it with the intent of improving Wayland.
Encouraging people to fuck off back to X is counterproductive because X is a DEAD END. It's like Republican politics: all it does is obstruct useful progress, by design. The maintainers of Xorg have decided that Wayland is the way to go, as have the maintainers of the major toolkits, DEs, and distros. Spreading FUD about Wayland in an attempt to encourage people to stick with X generates more heat than light, and is ultimately useless because no one wants to maintain X or the X code paths; these will eventually break or go away. Wayland is the community-supported option going forward. You can't even count on kernel support for X: the Asahi Linux kernel display driver actively detects if it's being called from an X server, and fails if it is.
When it comes to alternatives to both X and Wayland... good luck attracting the developer expertise and mindshare that Wayland already has. It's like coming up with an alternative to Facebook.
I teach college students; they mostly don't use Facebook because there are already literally lots of alternatives, and they didn't come about because of gatekeeping the commentary about the tech. Perfectly wrong example you gave there.
If this is true it's a testament to how poorly designed Wayland must be - for it to have such comprehensive support & still be as limited as it is today is quite the achievement.
> Shutting up and using Wayland is the sensible thing to do.
Sadly, you're probably right here. The network effect has indeed shifted toward Wayland - I'm putting up & shutting up with it in my current system; I should probably switch back to Xorg given how bad it is, but knowing I'll likely be going back to Wayland eventually the effort of two migrations seems futile.