How Close Fedora Is To Switching To Wayland By Default

[sarmad]

im preying they it isnt on by default as its to Crashy , but in real it wont be usable till atleast F26 or F27 IMO , surely they wont have all those features complete before Alpha

last time i tried it, it crashed every App.

look at the Wiki page, aboiut 6 or more things are still at 0% or 50% complete

When was the last time you tried it? On F23 it works relatively well. Still has bugs here and there but overall works quite well. When I tried it I saw problems with drag-n-drop, gnome terminal transparency issues, and issues with DRI_RPIME on radeon open source driver. Other than that it was working well. That said, I think you are right about it not being the default until maybe F26 since making it the default means it should work well on the vast majority of machines. But I guess many people will be switching to it ahead of that. There is already a lot of people who have all their needs already met by Wayland.

[Anvil]

When was the last time you tried it? On F23 it works relatively well. Still has bugs here and there but overall works quite well. When I tried it I saw problems with drag-n-drop, gnome terminal transparency issues, and issues with DRI_RPIME on radeon open source driver. Other than that it was working well. That said, I think you are right about it not being the default until maybe F26 since making it the default means it should work well on the vast majority of machines. But I guess many people will be switching to it ahead of that. There is already a lot of people who have all their needs already met by Wayland.

last time i tried it was in f24. i have used it in f22, it was Crashy there, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Wayland_features will tell you how much more work is needed on those features , but Gstreamer1 will also have to be finished with full Wayland support., i cant see it being turned on by default in f24's time frame they have left before the Alpha https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/24/Schedule

maybe f25 they might get it on by default. gtk+ an mutter still need heaps of work

i really hate vbulletin5. no wonder heaps of peeps complain or refuse to use it.

[Anvil]

by the looks of it, Wayland 1.10 should be in f24 also, whern it'll land i dunno

[Anvil]

ok Wayland session in f23 was ok at first, now crashing on me so im back to X11 gnome session

[davidbepo]

One more thing for the Toto list: icons on the desktop. Without those, many find the whole system unusable. Nautilus cannot do this in Wayland, neither can any other filebrowser. GNOME is said to be working on a standalone library to do this job. I've thought of another way that could be done with a patched file manager:

1: have the file manager open by default to a fullscreened, undecorated, non-closeable, always on the bottom window with the filepath set to ~/home/Desktop.
2: Select a custom background matching the desktop background for that window and that window only on the desktop
3: Permit manual arrangement of icon in that window and only that window, saving the layout.

couldnt agree more

[magika]

2: Select a custom background matching the desktop background for that window and that window only on the desktop

And then file manager will have to support every possible background placement (multidisplay span for example, or dynamic wallpapers) that shell supports, which is like GNOME2 but making file manager do desktop is retarded in many ways anyway. But you can do it without background, just render icons on a texture with zero alpha, everything is composited in wayland anyway.

But lets digress a bit, GNOME3 is space starved and users run things maximized most of the time. In such environment desktop icons are replaced by fullscreen applications menu, since menu is one Super-key press away, but to access desktop you have to minimize all windows.

[Luke]

And then file manager will have to support every possible background placement (multidisplay span for example, or dynamic wallpapers) that shell supports, which is like GNOME2 but making file manager do desktop is retarded in many ways anyway. But you can do it without background, just render icons on a texture with zero alpha, everything is composited in wayland anyway.

But lets digress a bit, GNOME3 is space starved and users run things maximized most of the time. In such environment desktop icons are replaced by fullscreen applications menu, since menu is one Super-key press away, but to access desktop you have to minimize all windows.

I usually get to the desktop by moving the window I am using, given that I am almost never fullscreening apps and never using the "one app per desktop" model which makes drag and drop useless. Any desktop environment that prohibits icons on the desktop will never make it to any of my systems unless I can modify it to work the way I want it to work.

In my case, if I were writing for my own use, only one background would ever be needed, coding for that already exists. I do like your suggestion about a transparent background (perhaps by a wayland runtime switch) to show the underlying background. Nemo does this in X but is buggy: black bg in non-compositing X and redraw failures in Compiz. A wayland-only switch would prevent this, yet avoid the issue of supporting changing or multiple backgrounds.

Ok, GNOME is said to be developing a standalone library to support drawing icons on the desktop, but this seems to be one of the very last parts of the package. If you recall, GNOME wanted to all the way remove icons on the desktop back when GNOME 3 first came out. They had to allow them to be re-enabled in the end, no doubt due to community pressure. It It is community pressure that forced GNOME to make the window list (bottom panel) extension and menu extensions part of the gnome-shell-extensions package, and community pressure that forced them to allow users to keep icons in menus. If GNOME wants to keep their userbase, they have to accept that people decide for themselves how their workflow will function and are not interested in forced changes to it.

You may ask why am I interested in this given that I use another DE? Well, Wayland is on the roadmap for MATE, and will have to be work there with icons on the desktop. If GNOME comes up with an upstream library, great! I will see it in my own routine tests of GNOME. Otherwise, I may end up with a lot of work to do on Caja to get it able to show icons in Wayland. Transparent bg on wayland-only is a great idea that, though in MATE the background code is still in three places instead of one as it is now in GNOME. One any DE supports icons on the desktop with wayland it will be much easier for all the others to offer them too.

[Luke]

And then file manager will have to support every possible background placement (multidisplay span for example, or dynamic wallpapers) that shell supports, which is like GNOME2 but making file manager do desktop is retarded in many ways anyway. But you can do it without background, just render icons on a texture with zero alpha, everything is composited in wayland anyway.

But lets digress a bit, GNOME3 is space starved and users run things maximized most of the time. In such environment desktop icons are replaced by fullscreen applications menu, since menu is one Super-key press away, but to access desktop you have to minimize all windows.

Not on my desktop-I just move the windows. For me to use any DE, it must support icons on the desktop. Otherwise it gets rejected. Surely many others will say the same. Not space-starved on my system, I have little interest in "mobile" or small form factors.

[SystemCrasher]

Actually GNOME will have to make their Wayland stack be able to use NVIDIAs EGLStreams and EGLDevice proposal. A new driver from NVIDIA isn't enough.

IIRC there was idea to make EGL more or less generic interface, not really specific to Nvidia. If no other drivers would support it, maintaining special intergace for nvidia only sounds very dumb to me.

[magika]

Not on my desktop-I just move the windows. For me to use any DE, it must support icons on the desktop. Otherwise it gets rejected. Surely many others will say the same. Not space-starved on my system, I have little interest in "mobile" or small form factors.

Can't say I use small screens -- I have two displays, one of them is 27'' hidpi, and GNOME feels helluva crampled -- windows have big titlebars and shell wastes vertical space with two panels. I run everything maximized and only occasionally tile two windows on the side just for the sake of having two windows interacting on the same screen.