I’m currently writing an article on the subject, and want to properly represent people’s views.

  • edinbruh@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The point 2.1 “less to implement in the compositor” doesn’t apply, because for xwayland go work (which is intended to stay around for the foreseeable future) mutter still needs to implement SSD, it’s only skipping on implementing the Wayland SSD protocols.

    • ashx64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That can be dropped eventually too. Compositors like Niri don’t implement Xwayland support directly, and instead use Xwayland Satellite.

      • edinbruh@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        PING. Commenting just for the notification. I edited to respond to the other points but in the meantime you had already answered.

        • ashx64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          “We do <thing > because we always did before <thing 2>” is not a good point

          I didn’t mean it in a “this is better way”. I’m just saying that Wayland was designed around the idea of client side decorations, not server side decorations. Gnome has stuck to the more purist vision of Wayland, which makes sense since I believe they were its biggest proponent.

          • edinbruh@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            yeah, but the point of a platform are the applications it supports, you don’t want to be The King of Nothing. If even after buying into wayland, applications still work bad on gnome because they expect to get support for X, than gnome needs X or to give a better option (better for the applications, not just according to themselves).