Are We Wayland Yet?

> most people are already using wayland

I would love to hear how you can possibly know that.

> it's not our fault you decided that you want to use fluxbox on gentoo

If you like monocultures and arbitrary restrictions, maybe try Darwin?

I'd imagine they're basing their conclusions of off telemetry data from Ubuntu and Fedora. After all, Linux is just like Firefox: everyone who uses it absolutely loves sharing information about themselves with corporations! Telemetry data therefore presents an accurate, unbiased picture of the entire userbase.

Lol. But it's actually worse than that; Firefox enables telemetry by default and then ignores everyone who opts out, but I'm not aware of any Linux distros that enable it by default (Ubuntu apparently used to, until it silently broke and then they removed it: https://itsubuntu.com/no-more-popularity-contest-package-by-...).

Maybe they count Chromebooks? Those use Wayland.

Hah, I forgot about that. A bit like calling Android Linux, but yes that probably does dwarf the rest of us.

Xorg was the stagnant monoculture though, and you were complaining about an alternative to it because it does not suit you exactly.

Xorg resulted in a stagnant monoculture in the display server itself, but allowed arbitrary stuff to build on top. If wayland results in a monoculture of desktop environments, that will be a regression. On the other hand, yes; if wayland results in a healthy ecosystem of compositors that are actually as functional as Xorg was (because by all accounts that should be a low bar, right?) then we will come out far ahead.

> Xorg [...] allowed arbitrary stuff to build on top.

Same as wayland.

> If wayland results in a monoculture of desktop environments, that will be a regression.

It isn't, because you have everything that's ported to Wayland _and_ everything that's ported to X11. So it's the opposite of a monoculture.

>> Xorg [...] allowed arbitrary stuff to build on top.

> Same as wayland.

No, because Wayland puts everything on the compositor. X11 let me run the same screenshot tool on GNOME, KDE, and dwm. In wayland, the only way to support GNOME, KDE, and sway is to add multiple backends. In X11, window managers and compositors were interchangeable and orthogonal; in Wayland, the "window manager" is subsumed into the compositor (now mandatory), which is the display server. I really like keynav. AFAICT, implementing an equivalent in Wayland requires integration into each compositor. There's still a monolith, but it got moved up the stack to a place where it prevents piecemeal environments.

I don't see anything you wrote that means you can't build arbitrary stuff on top of Wayland.