I'd be all for everyone coming together and defining a new POSIX API but somehow I doubt we could get everyone at the table to agree on a new spec. But hey, here's hoping
we are back at step one. you either want to run it, or not. either way, being against ide's dependency only because it is a dependency, is stupid.
Why the hell is Canonical developing Mir? What does Mir do that Weston cannot? Further, why is Canonical not making Mir compatible with the Wayland Protocol? What is the real reason? I've read the "media statements" and I can't figure out where the payoff is. It's just a whole lot of work and I don't see what it's going to allow them to do better. I can understand developing Unity Desktop because it is a visually distinctive appearance and it gives Ubuntu some individuality from the other Linux DEs (I'm very happy with Unity design IMHO). But why pump limited resources into things like UpStart and Mir when you are only going to cripple them with CLA stuff? #1) it alienates the community you speak to support and praise and #2) it prevents your work from being widely adopted because the wider community is opposed to CLA crap.
So is Mir a legitimate need, or is it just to get something with a CLA on it like UpStart had? But if it's just to get a CLA on it, doesn't Canonical see that it won't survive? The community is not going to support it. And Canonical isn't the equivalent of Apple with billions of dollars to blow on doing everything itself. I agree with a previous post which stated that UpStart never took off because of the CLA. It's just not appropriate for the community to embrace something like that. I don't see how Mir will fare any better than UpStart. I just don't see how it's going to be better than Wayland compositors nor how it's going to make Unity so much better that it justifies the cost/work, alienated community, etc.
It's not fair to compare Mir to Upstart. When Upstart came out, it was light years ahead of SysVInit, and systemd wasn't even a sparkle in Lennart's eye. CLA ended up killing it, but at the time it really was something we needed.So is Mir a legitimate need, or is it just to get something with a CLA on it like UpStart had?
If you go back to when Mir was first announced, it's clear that the developers didn't know what they were talking about, citing weaknesses in Wayland that didn't exist. They even had the gall to claim that one of their strengths was the ability to use Android drivers, by using a library that was designed for Wayland!
The only immediate benefit to Mir is that they can develop features in the order that's important to them, and they don't have to deal with the bureaucracy of getting things patched upstream.