Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Technical Plans For Making Wayland 1.0

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by KellyClowers View Post
    In my opinion, it doesn't really solve any problems that need solving
    It solves several problems that need solving. That's why it exists in the first place.

    Network transparency - sure, they say "we'll just layer it on top, it will be easy and work well". But so far it is a no-show. I also haven't seen whether or not it would be possible to do single windows like X, as opposed to full desktop.
    It is trivially possible to do per-window remoting like X11 does with the Wayland design. It is also trivially possible to do whole-desktop remoting, if that's what you need. The protocol is agnostic to remoting and lets the remoting proxy do whatever it wants however it needs in whatever way the users want it to do.

    I've written about it before, sick of repeating the full spiel about why whining about Wayland's remoting is silly. It's possible. Nobody's done it because nobody who actually matters has cared enough to implement it. If you care about it, implement it.

    Then there is the client-side window decoration thing, which is just stupid.
    It is superior to server-side window decorations. It fixes several otherwise impossible-to-fix problems. At worst it introduces the "locked up windows can't be moved or killed" problem, but then only if the compositor is retarded and doesn't deal with dead zones and non-responding windows in a sane way. It's a non-problem in the real world, and all the people bitching about it are only bitching because they used Windows 95 once some years ago and saw problems that no longer affect any of the more recent modern composited client-side-only OSes, which Wayland is merely trying to catch up to in terms of user experience and feature set.

    And the "you have to write a compositor to write a WM" thing seem iffy to me.
    Not having a compositor is a problem. A serious problem. Not only does the lack of compositing bar a large number of useful features for users, it also massively complicates the entire graphics stack, the driver stack, rendering APIs like OpenGL (which still assumes a lack of a compositor, and hence is a total bitch to use when setting up contexts, because you have to directly bind to a shared framebuffer with a fixed set of color, depth, and stencil buffers, rather than each app getting its own configurable buffers; and so you end up being wasteful and using an extra FBO that you shouldn't need to have just to support crappy desktop platforms like Win9x/XP and Linux/X11).

    I am not sure how big a problem this is, but it was not reassuring the way they first talked as if there was no possibility of WMs. Just a misunderstanding, it seems, but the compositor may still be an issue.
    There is no possibility of WMs as you know them. They would be plugins to the compositor, or replacement compositors, at most.

    Nothing wrong with that, either. The world does not need 400 different broken WMs when just one good WM does all you need.

    Comment


    • #17
      It is superior to server-side window decorations. It fixes several otherwise impossible-to-fix problems. At worst it introduces the "locked up windows can't be moved or killed" problem, but then only if the compositor is retarded and doesn't deal with dead zones and non-responding windows in a sane way. It's a non-problem in the real world, and all the people bitching about it are only bitching because they used Windows 95 once some years ago and saw problems that no longer affect any of the more recent modern composited client-side-only OSes, which Wayland is merely trying to catch up to in terms of user experience and feature set.
      It happened to me just last week on Win7. Do tell, which "more recent modern composited client-side-only OSes" are you referring to?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by elanthis View Post
        It's a non-problem in the real world, and all the people bitching about it are only bitching because they used Windows 95 once some years ago and saw problems that no longer affect any of the more recent modern composited client-side-only OSes, which Wayland is merely trying to catch up to in terms of user experience and feature set.
        Yes, I am sure developers of popular window managers know absolutely nothing about designing window managers

        Comment

        Working...
        X