←back to thread

Are We Wayland Yet?

(arewewaylandyet.com)
96 points picture | 3 comments | 07 Jul 22 22:22 UTC | HN request time: 0.638s | source
Show context
yjftsjthsd-h ◴[07 Jul 22 23:08 UTC] No.32020831[source]▶
Oh sweet, I just have replace most of my applications and DE and everything will just work! /s
replies(3): >>32020885 #>>32021027 #>>32021294 #
risho ◴[07 Jul 22 23:27 UTC] No.32021027[source]▶
ubuntu and fedora are both shipping wayland out of the box with gnome which covers the overwhelming majority of every day users. most people are already using wayland. it's not our fault you decided that you want to use fluxbox on gentoo
replies(2): >>32021110 #>>32021692 #
yjftsjthsd-h ◴[07 Jul 22 23:37 UTC] No.32021110[source]▶
> 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?

replies(3): >>32021284 #>>32021346 #>>32022066 #
throwawaylinux ◴[08 Jul 22 01:44 UTC] No.32022066[source]▶
Xorg was the stagnant monoculture though, and you were complaining about an alternative to it because it does not suit you exactly.
replies(1): >>32022283 #
yjftsjthsd-h ◴[08 Jul 22 02:20 UTC] No.32022283[source]▶
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.
replies(1): >>32023031 #
1. throwawaylinux ◴[08 Jul 22 04:09 UTC] No.32023031[source]▶
> 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.

replies(1): >>32023736 #
2. yjftsjthsd-h ◴[08 Jul 22 05:43 UTC] No.32023736[source]▶
>> 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.

replies(1): >>32024906 #
3. throwawaylinux ◴[08 Jul 22 09:44 UTC] No.32024906[source]▶
I don't see anything you wrote that means you can't build arbitrary stuff on top of Wayland.