Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 52

Thread: Mark Shuttleworth: Mir By Default In Ubuntu 16.04 LTS

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toka View Post
    Mir = protocol agnostic display server. This means, it can support X11, Wayland, or something else. Is there a Mir protocol?
    Wayland = protocol
    Nope, it means it cannot support any protocol, neither X11 nor Wayland. There is no Mir protocol, there is a Mir API.
    In the end it is not very different: a display server must present an interface so that clients can draw things on the screen.
    The only thing is that all Wayland compositors use the same interface, defined by the Wayland protocol, while Mir uses its own interface, defined by its API.

    Although wayland is only the protocol, it has strong implications for the architecture and the design of any implementation of it.
    That is why you can compare them directly (instead of a specific implementation) regarding technicalities and architecture.
    Also, it will ensure compatibility between clients and compositors following the protocol, so Mir and Wayland can be considered as two blocks when comparing adoption and the like.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nll_a View Post
    It's funny that the ones who compare Canonical and Shuttleworth to Apple and Jobs are the same ones who think they are entitled to tell people what is The Right Way to Workę. In open source, people do whatever they feel is right for them, and no one has the right to tell anyone how to do shit. There's no open source bible.
    Nice dodge! For a second it looked like it might hit you, but you cleverly managed to evade it on the last moment, and allowed the point to go flying right over your head. Seriously, this is some cinematic shit going on here!

    Of course Canonical is free to do what they want. It's their money, they can invest it all in two-legged chairs if they so choose. The question is not whether they have a right to do it, the question is IS IT SMART.

    And the answer is, no it's not. By constantly reinventing everything, they're not taking advantage of the main benefits of the open source model (collaboration!). You're right, they do have a right to do stupid things. It still doesn't make those things any less stupid.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spittie View Post
    Just like the Wayland preview for Ubuntu 12.04, Wayland by default in Ubuntu 12.10 and Mir by default in Ubuntu 13.10, right?
    Mark just loves to do big announcements, it doesn't matter if he isn't probably even involved in the development process, and so he doesn't know the current status...

    Seeing their record track, I think that Canonical will jump on a different ship (Like they did for upstart), or that Mir will not be ready for Ubuntu 16.04. That said, only time will tell.

    EDIT: after re-reading the post, I realize that Michael already linked those/similar articles, and I feel silly. My point still applies.
    And Wayland support for Gnome 3.12 was delayed as well, but I don't conclude that their approach is doomed and they should "jump ship" to something else... Fedora was also delayed a number of times on its latest release. There are always unexpected issues or expansions of scope, the only fundamental conclusion you can come to from this is that accurate predictions in software aren't easy.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynical View Post
    And Wayland support for Gnome 3.12 was delayed as well, but I don't conclude that their approach is doomed and they should "jump ship" to something else...
    No, because there's nothing else to jump to.

    Fedora was also delayed a number of times on its latest release. There are always unexpected issues or expansions of scope, the only fundamental conclusion you can come to from this is that accurate predictions in software aren't easy.
    But Fedora was never delayed because they decided that "hey, the Linux kernel just doesn't suit our needs any more somehow, so we're starting our own inhouse project, Finux, which is basically the same as Linux, does all the same things, but the difference is we get to change the APIs however we want and we will never stick to any protocol or worry about compatibility with other software".

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    469

    Default

    That was a terrible comparison; don't try to compare something like Wayland, Xorg, or Mir to the freaking Linux kernel ever again.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    341

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    But Fedora was never delayed because they decided that "hey, the Linux kernel just doesn't suit our needs any more somehow, so we're starting our own inhouse project, Finux, which is basically the same as Linux, does all the same things, but the difference is we get to change the APIs however we want and we will never stick to any protocol or worry about compatibility with other software".
    QFT. Fedora was delayed because they didn't have enough time to do the necessary, not because their resources are consumed in doing unnecessary work like Ubuntu. If Canonical saved those resources and just used Wayland (or even just stick to X.org) they probably wouldn't have needed to delay their convergence plan.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarmad View Post
    QFT. Fedora was delayed because they didn't have enough time to do the necessary, not because their resources are consumed in doing unnecessary work like Ubuntu. If Canonical saved those resources and just used Wayland (or even just stick to X.org) they probably wouldn't have needed to delay their convergence plan.
    I think the convergance time would be 100% the same with wayland. I am sure that not even 1% of their resources go into "protocol" definition.

    - the new compositor they had to create anyway for the whole convergence transition
    - unity 8 had to be a whole rebuild anyway for the convergence
    - all the helper components have to be created anyway to achieve their vision
    - the SDK has to be build anyway for the convergence
    - actually not using could have accelerated the unity 8 development and DM work because as it goes and as needs come up they can just quickly design it to what they exactly need.

    So please dont believe that the lack of wayland delays the convergence vision.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    No, because there's nothing else to jump to.



    But Fedora was never delayed because they decided that "hey, the Linux kernel just doesn't suit our needs any more somehow, so we're starting our own inhouse project, Finux, which is basically the same as Linux, does all the same things, but the difference is we get to change the APIs however we want and we will never stick to any protocol or worry about compatibility with other software".
    Yeah way to completely miss the point of my post in order to bash Canonical yet again. Delays happen, predictions aren't accurate. That doesn't mean what you are working on is doomed.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sarmad View Post
    QFT. Fedora was delayed because they didn't have enough time to do the necessary, not because their resources are consumed in doing unnecessary work like Ubuntu.
    Yeah that's not subjective at all.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynical View Post
    Yeah way to completely miss the point of my post in order to bash Canonical yet again. Delays happen, predictions aren't accurate. That doesn't mean what you are working on is doomed.
    No. There are other reasons for why Mir is doomed. Like the fact that Mir requires its own graphics stack, which requires maintaining Mir-specific patches, and that Mir won't be compatible with Wayland clients, and then there's all the toolkits, requiring Canonical to patch in Mir support to toolkits, which requires maintaining even more Mir-specific patches...

    That's a lot of extra work that wouldn't be necessary if they just used Wayland.

    See, the real benefit with Wayland is that it's a collaborative effort. All the other distros and DE's are behind it, contributing code and/or supporting it, porting toolkits and applications, making necessary changes to the graphics stack... That's one of the main benefits of open source, it's the reason why the Linux kernel has gotten so popular - the most used kernel in the world and the largest software project in the history of mankind. It's because the open source model lets even competing companies collaborate on something, sharing both the workload and the benefits. It saves resources for everyone.

    Canonical is doing the exact opposite, they're taking bits and pieces of other people's work, cobbling them together and adjusting them to make them incompatible with others. Mir wouldn't be even possible without all the groundwork done by Wayland developers, and Canonical is now taking advantage of that work in order to create their own private in-house solution, but they're missing out on the larger advantage of the collaborative development model.

Posting Permissions

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