I am not a GUI programmer but I have watched heaps of talks from the X11/Wayland devs to get a handle on the arguments and it seems to me that while Wayland has some actual architectural issues (screensharing is hard) they pale in comparison to X (the cruft of remote sessions + thin clients, the security issues)
and most of the issues people have with Wayland are that it does not provide continuity with X. Like even the post here “Wayland breaks everything and they expect others to fix it”.
Yeah, it sucks having to rebuild everything for a new architecture but we aren’t doing it because it’s easy and we are not doing it because it’s fashionable. We are doing it because X is making it hard to deliver the desktop that needs to be delivered.
Much like systemd, for me, the pros have far outweighed the cons. My computer functions as I hope it to and I believe to be getting the best of modern software.
I am not a GUI programmer but I have watched heaps of talks from the X11/Wayland devs to get a handle on the arguments and it seems to me that while Wayland has some actual architectural issues (screensharing is hard) they pale in comparison to X (the cruft of remote sessions + thin clients, the security issues) and most of the issues people have with Wayland are that it does not provide continuity with X. Like even the post here “Wayland breaks everything and they expect others to fix it”.
Yeah, it sucks having to rebuild everything for a new architecture but we aren’t doing it because it’s easy and we are not doing it because it’s fashionable. We are doing it because X is making it hard to deliver the desktop that needs to be delivered.
Much like systemd, for me, the pros have far outweighed the cons. My computer functions as I hope it to and I believe to be getting the best of modern software.