Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Wayland 1.3 Release Candidate 2 Arrives For Testing

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,422

    Default Wayland 1.3 Release Candidate 2 Arrives For Testing

    Phoronix: Wayland 1.3 Release Candidate 2 Arrives For Testing

    The release of Wayland 1.3 and the reference Weston 1.3 compositor is near...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ3NTk

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,932

    Default Downstream

    Hope it gets picked up by downstream fast.

    It probably gets picked up by ArchLinux fast.
    But Debian and Ubuntu still doesn't have 1.2.0.

    They're still on 1.1.0 or 1.0.5 or so.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    674

    Default

    Fedora 20 doesn't yet seem to offer the Wayland tech preview.

    The wayland-mutter stuff is installed by default but no option present at the login screen.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Fedora is the most important place since it is the gravity center for Wayland and Gnome development. Fear not, Fedora saves all
    Yeah, but it's such a train wreck, aside being an incubation zone for a server OS - I installed the daily build yesterday which made me recall how shitty, weird and fancy is the installer - a bad design for smartphones applied to the PC, like putting lipstick on a pig.
    Last edited by mark45; 10-03-2013 at 09:51 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    Fedora 20 doesn't yet seem to offer the Wayland tech preview.

    The wayland-mutter stuff is installed by default but no option present at the login screen.
    GNOME Wayland status under Fedora 20 Alpha

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Yeah pre release Fedora can be a bit shakey. You sound more like an ubuntu kinda guy. Stay at a service packed LTS version to be sure. Have fun in Canonical land when Mir is released.
    whats this Mir thing you're talking about sounds like vaporware to me

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Yeah pre release Fedora can be a bit shakey. You sound more like an ubuntu kinda guy. Stay at a service packed LTS version to be sure. Have fun in Canonical land when Mir is released.
    For sure, anyone not loving Fedora must be an Ubuntu user. Another great example of Honton's logic.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Fedora is the most important place since it is the gravity center for Wayland and Gnome development. Fear not, Fedora saves all
    I thought you didn't like MIT-licensed software? Weston is MIT-licensed and only works with MIT-licensed graphics drivers.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    Yeah pre release Fedora can be a bit shakey. You sound more like an ubuntu kinda guy. Stay at a service packed LTS version to be sure. Have fun in Canonical land when Mir is released.
    I dislike Canonical and hate Mir, all for wayland, but apparently I'll use Ubuntu & Mir cause I find Unity a lot better thought out than Gnome 3 and desktop Fedora, despite Fedora probably being technically superior, which is why Fedora sucks to me as a desktop solution but is good for servers. So I'm not ideological, I go for what's easiest and sucks less out of the box. If Fedora makes a redesign of Gnome 3 to the better I'll switch over.
    Last edited by mark45; 10-03-2013 at 11:37 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Honton View Post
    I suggest you start out thinking really hard about the difference between FSF-style CA and commercial CLA
    Actually, I'd like you to explain this to me.

    As a general rule I accept different levels of restrictions to different kind of software can be beneficial, but asymmetric licensing is always wrong.
    1) You can accept software which can be closed by anyone at any time.

    2) You can't accept Qt which is LGPL and can be closed by one party only, and if that happens, it automatically becomes 1)

    No, I don't understand it because it doesn't make any sense. A neutral observer would get the idea that you are simply trolling, as evidenced by all your "KDE is dying" posts.

Posting Permissions

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