Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 132

Thread: Why Wayland & Weston Were Forked

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,759

    Default Why Wayland & Weston Were Forked

    Phoronix: Why Wayland & Weston Were Forked

    Last week, Wayland/Weston was forked by a long-time contributor, Scott Moreau. The fork of the Wayland/Weston display server ended up becoming known as Northfield/Norwood, following disagreements within the Wayland development camp. Scott Moreau was ultimately banned from the Wayland mailing list and IRC channel, so he's written an exclusive, independent article for Phoronix to explain his actions and why he felt a fork of the Wayland display server protocol and the reference Weston compositor were necessary.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18588

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    48

    Default

    So far as all the drama nonsense that has happened because of this, I think it has caused certain people to show their true colors. I also think that the people doing the 'mud slinging' have not shown their brightest colors.

    One comment that I hope this post answers is one by Darxus, an influential personality that has been a consistent problem against me. Taken from the GH-Next phoronix article comments:

    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...971#post321971

    “Also, lets not forget that soreau was not banned due to his lack of social grace alone. The final straw was his refusal to use an existing mechanism to retain protocol compatibility when making his needed protocol changes, insisting on doing it in a way that would break things, without providing a reason”

    First of all, for the record, Darxus is not a core wayland developer. If you would like to be the judge, please refer to his wayland/weston commits. Second of all, this is a completely false statement. It also has a very tyrannical tone to it. The implication is that I am not compliant with certain fabricated 'rules'.

    On the contrary, I have been fully compliant with Kristian and the other core wayland developers. However, when ultimate goals diverge to the point where two parties can no longer work together, it is not a particularly good investment of time to continue trying to solve problems from either side.

    Darxus and Daniel's mud-slinging works throughout this ordeal are frivolous, unwarranted, unnecessary, childish, completely ridiculous and an outright waste of everyone's time – with specific intent to damage my public image. Let's not allow these such incidents to overshadow the countless amount of good people who have put in the time, work and dedication to bring us to the point where we are today.

    I enjoy working on this code and it's not too terribly difficult once you have the basics down. On the other hand, the effort required for me to convey my reasonings to others immense. I think one of the reasons I have failed to communicate effectively is because it takes more time. Time is costly and I don't have a lot to go around. Also, explaining myself repeatedly gives me a headache. I don't plan on doing much more of it in this context.

    A quick comment about Mir. I do not necessarily see their decision as wrong because it is right for them. However, I do think that Mark Shuttleworth should probably have explained a lot more in detail his reasonings. He owes it to all the people that believed him when he vowed to use wayland as their next display platform target.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soreau View Post
    Darxus and Daniel's mud-slinging works throughout this ordeal are frivolous, unwarranted, unnecessary, childish, completely ridiculous and an outright waste of everyone's time.
    Are you saying that you did nothing wrong? You don't think you were rude and abusive at all? Are you the only victim here? Why do you think that Daniel and Darxus got the idea that you are? I'm not terribly interested in FOSS drama and I don't know the details of this case but I your lack of self-criticism is not very convincing.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soreau View Post
    One comment that I hope this post answers is one by Darxus, an influential personality that has been a consistent problem against me. Taken from the GH-Next phoronix article comments:

    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...971#post321971

    “Also, lets not forget that soreau was not banned due to his lack of social grace alone. The final straw was his refusal to use an existing mechanism to retain protocol compatibility when making his needed protocol changes, insisting on doing it in a way that would break things, without providing a reason”

    First of all, for the record, Darxus is not a core wayland developer. If you would like to be the judge, please refer to his wayland/weston commits. Second of all, this is a completely false statement. It also has a very tyrannical tone to it. The implication is that I am not compliant with certain fabricated 'rules'.
    No, it's not false. You wrote a four page article explaining why you forked weston instead of just creating a new shell plugin, when that was not the issue. The issue was why you forked wayland (the protocol library), instead of forking only weston, copying the existing protocol from wayland into your weston fork, and making your needed protocol changes there - using the existing mechanism to retain protocol compatibility.

    As people have repeatedly attempted to explain to you: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archive...ch/008172.html

    Retaining protocol compatibility, when there is an easy, already provided way to do it, is not a "fabricated 'rule'". It is the generally accepted way of writing software.

    --- Day changed Tue Mar 26 2013
    12:07PM <@krh> the fork is fine, the drama around it wasnt


    "I am not going to point fingers here because I do not think this is the fault of any one particular individual."

    Quote Originally Posted by soreau View Post
    Darxus and Daniel's mud-slinging works throughout this ordeal are frivolous, unwarranted, unnecessary, childish, completely ridiculous and an outright waste of everyone's time – with specific intent to damage my public image.
    That didn't last long.


    "I would also like to see people come together and work things out despite misunderstandings and interest conflicts."

    --- Day changed Tue Mar 12 2013
    12:28 < soreau> I DONT GIVE A SHIT what you ignorant people think about attitude, politics and a bunch of crap that doesn't even matter
    ...
    12:32 < Darxus> soreau: FYI, not giving a shit about people is exactly your problem.
    12:32 < soreau> Darxus: You're a fucking idiot


    One of these was intended for a public audience, the other was sincere.

  5. #5

    Default

    So while Ubuntu works on a unified display server for devices....*sigh*

    Liam of GamingOnLinux.com

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liamdawe View Post
    So while Ubuntu works on a unified display server for devices....*sigh*
    It is a one-distro-only solution at this time which means it is not a unified display server for devices. personally, I am interested to know what steam and other proprietary applications such as google-chrome will choose to support.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    459

    Default

    I quickly skimmed through the mailing list of wayland (March only). The biggest problem seems to be the implementation of handling windows (surfaces) with respect to minimize/maximize/resize. You wanted this in the Wayland protocol, but the current upstream developers want it 'to flesh out'?

    It seems that this is coming from a chicken-and-egg problem, listed here:

    <krh> weston isn't going to be a full DE, starting a new DE is
    specifically a non-goal of wayland
    <krh> and I've always said that fleshing out wl_shell will have to
    wait until we have at least one real DE to driver the work
    <krh> otherwise it's all just going to be guesswork
    They want to do this in a Wayland shell, but don't know how. While on the other side, you want to move forward and implement it in Wayland itself.

    I get the frustration. But I still don't understand why they got angry when you wanted to fork Wayland as well (aside from Weston) as listed here.

    Best of luck though!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    144

    Default There is no spoon.

    Do not try to minimize to desktop — that's impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth: there is no desktop.

    The thing is, minimizing is not really what you think it is. What most people had engraved in their heads is this idea of the desktop as this physical under-layer that lurks beneath their windows. The metaphor has become so powerful that users refuse to have icons on their desktop because it's "messy". Part of this metaphor is putting windows in drawers, the so called "minimizing".

    What you need to deconstruct is that all of this desktop and windows business should be seen without the metaphor: Imagine a persistent surface that takes full screen and has no minimize \ maximize \ close buttons on itself. It might have a "task bar" that allows clicking "buttons" on associated boxes to bring other windows before or behind this "desktop". It might be simply a wait-for-right-click surface \ button that launches a small menu (openbox). It could be something like plan9's rio that only allows a term to be launched and actions to be preformed on surfaces. It could be a big tiling surface filled with icons representing actions like windows 8 or ios. It could also have one button that launches a partial or full screen menu like window 7 or android...

    Once you realize this, you can understand that:
    "Minimizing" another surface simply means it's moved behind the desktop surface.
    "Maximize" means drawing to full screen and taking focus above all the other surfaces.

    As for the previews, those are just a simple case of drawing on mouse-over the associated window with scaled down raster. It doesn't take a special API or anything.

    The functionality achieved this way surpasses the desktop metaphor and yet can mimic it perfectly without added APIs. Their's no need for "minimize" or "maximize" beyond taking focus. It is the client's responsibility to manager the particularities of the windows behavior, not the display server's.

    Yours, Spoon Boy.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by c117152 View Post
    <double_post>
    This user is double posting the same ridiclous nonsense.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,114

    Default

    So why didn't you explain all this on the mailing list when you were asked repeatedly there?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •