How Close Fedora Is To Switching To Wayland By Default

[Zan Lynx]

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.

I've seen many people who use desktop icons get used to Windows's Win+D shortcut very quickly. It hides all windows and shows the desktop.

What I think you'd like and is something Gnome could do easily (or much more easily than some of these other suggestions), is a view like the current App View, but with user movable icons for apps and documents. Then it could be All, Frequent, Desktop and the user picks one. Then it would be a quick Windows+A to make it pop up.

[BlueJayofEvil]

pointer confinement so I can play shooters

I completely agree. Pointer confinement is a big issue for gaming as well as other applications. Hopefully it'll be ready in the coming months.

[pal666]

NVIDIA driver support

fedora does not support proprietary shit

[MartinN]

Phoronix: How Close Fedora Is To Switching To Wayland By Default

Kevin Martin of the Fedora Project has written a status update and plan around the "Wayland-by-default" effort for Fedora 24...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...Status-January

Just wanna add - forget me or other fanboys, do it right, then release, even if it's Fedora 25. I'm a helluva lot more inclined to have something working which doesn't crash every 5 minutes or every 10 clicks, than something out the door to satisfy fanboism. This is an epochal migration from an old old (X11) legacy - and I'm tired of the peanut gallery saying there's never gonna be a desktop Linux....... The least one would expect is kde and gnome to get this right.... being two most widely used desktops and all.

[GreatEmerald]

Like I said, everyone uses computers differently. I don't maximize apps at all other than video playback or games, never have. I will never run without icons on the desktop-period. Great thing about FOSS is that unlike closed/paid software you really do have a choice. So far you still do even inside GNOME, let's hope it stays that way,

Plasma Shell will have a directory view plasmoid once it's capable of running on Wayland, for one.

[Luke]

Like I said, everyone uses computers differently. I don't maximize apps at all other than video playback or games, never have. I will never run without icons on the desktop-period. Great thing about FOSS is that unlike closed/paid software you really do have a choice. So far you still do even inside GNOME, let's hope it stays that way,

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.