Originally posted by Daktyl198
View Post
Miracle-WM Announced As A Wayland Compositor Built On Mir
Collapse
X
-
-
-
Originally posted by ehansin View PostI'd love to see a somewhat "no-nonsense" shell that allows for some tasteful animations, allows both tiling and floating modes, simple and clean configurations syntax, etc. More than just a bare-bones tiling manager, but simpler than a full-blow desktop environment. A shell that can do more than the former, but tends to get more "out of your way" than the later.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by varikonniemi View PostContrary to what xorg heads ran with as propaganda, seems like wayland has provided a fertile ground from where modern DE:s can grow.!
The soil that makes everything rot is not called "fertile" in my dictionary.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by gotar View Post
...and simply fade away, as most of the compositors I've bookmarked received no further updates after initial announcement.
The soil that makes everything rot is not called "fertile" in my dictionary.
Also, how many X implementations rotted away before everyone standardized on the current one? It would be identical to all wayland implementations except wlroots faded away. So things look much brighter in wayland land.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by varikonniemi View Posthow does this differ from similar projects on x? In no way.
Also, how many X implementations rotted away before everyone standardized on the current one?
It would be identical to all wayland implementations except wlroots faded away. So things look much brighter in wayland land.
People don't roll their own wayland compositors because they need different display server (~X11), but because they want different window/desktop management.
Actually wlroots can be treated as the only portable and reusable Wayland implementation, therefore wlroots~X11 (display server and boilerplate), while wlroots-based compositors~WMs/DMs.
From that perspective there is currently only one "common" display server (wlroots) and a bunch of incompatible ones (including KDE and especially incompatible GNOME).
You state that propagating incompatibilities (due to the lack of protocols, creating them late or marking them as optional) is "brighter"?
I remember many dramas with different concurrent implementations, including core ones (eglibc) and that was never brighter.
And I'm worried now, there will forever be GNOME-only applications.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by royce View PostSource?
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by SViN View Post
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by royce View Post
I'm not seeing anything there that current wayland compositors can't do. What wayland does have is real-world usage and adoption.
if you want something more current we can talk about the fact that it surpassed X feature parity and security about 4 years ago
This is the follow-up to the ‘Arcan versus Xorg: approaching feature parity’ article which is recommended reading if you have not done so already. After that article, there was on…
Reality is:
1. When you only deal with 1 implementation
2. When you don't have to deal with bureaucracy(yes wayland should have a BDFL)
3. When you actually work instead of arguing with the needs of others and voting
shit gets done
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by SViN View Post
I posted that because that was 10 years ago.
if you want something more current we can talk about the fact that it surpassed X feature parity and security about 4 years ago
This is the follow-up to the ‘Arcan versus Xorg: approaching feature parity’ article which is recommended reading if you have not done so already. After that article, there was on…
Reality is:
1. When you only deal with 1 implementation
2. When you don't have to deal with bureaucracy(yes wayland should have a BDFL)
3. When you actually work instead of arguing with the needs of others and voting
shit gets done
Comment
-
Comment