Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

XWayland Sees Updated Protocol Support To Help WLROOTS & KDE

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    Because Wayland incorporated Window Management and Compositor in one entity
    compositing window managers were invented for x11 before inception of wayland. wayland incorporated display server with window manager, that was its main selling point - to shorten roundtrips client->server->wm and back
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    , and the layers of window management is hardware accelerated. Don't you think that policy management to prevent screen capturing is a much better idea than simply not implementing the ability to screen capture?
    what makes you think implementing policy is easier than implementing screen capture?
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    Don't you think that a purpose designed sandbox would be a better implementation than a compositor developer simply not implementing features?
    what makes you think implementation of sandbox is easier than implementation of screen capture?
    Originally posted by duby229 View Post
    The problem with Wayland -IS- the scope... The fact that it's taking so long is that everything is getting redeveloped multiple times over by multiple different teams all trying and failing to do the exact same thing.
    you don't have to reimplement screen capture, you have to bind some keypress to piece of code calling some standard video codec. and isn't every desktop anyway is reimplementing every app in x11 mode? why reimplementing (screencapturing) apps is good, while reimplementing display servers is bad?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Azrael5 View Post
      Why to use wayland if applications continue to be based on xorg? That's the problem!
      the hope is to have few such non-native apps and even fewer with time. if you distro runs every program via xwayland, switch distro
      Last edited by pal666; 09-05-2019, 10:21 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by pal666 View Post
        both firefox and chromium are gtk3 and still using xwayland. because compositor is easy, rewriting every app using x11 is hard
        Firefox has complete Wayland support - I use it daily and it's much smoother than the X11 version.
        Last edited by beniwtv; 09-06-2019, 03:45 AM. Reason: Correction

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by timofonic View Post
          Why does wayland need to implement that?
          Why does wayland need to implement anything at all anyway?

          Just let everyone make their own protocols and display servers/compositors with their own, incompatible, APIs.

          That's the future. Why does Wayland even exist?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by pal666 View Post
            both firefox and chromium are gtk3 and still using xwayland. because compositor is easy, rewriting every app using x11 is hard
            So the real issue are the linux developers. that's the real problem. Linux developers are the real anachronism.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by beniwtv View Post

              Firefox has complete Wayland support - I use it daily and it's much smoother than the X11 version.
              All is better in Wayland... only those idiots linux xorg apps programmers claim stupid excuses because they are not able to develop programs in native wayland mode.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Weasel View Post
                Why does wayland need to implement anything at all anyway?

                Just let everyone make their own protocols and display servers/compositors with their own, incompatible, APIs.

                That's the future. Why does Wayland even exist?
                That's not Wayland specific. It's how FOSS works, and always has been. And it's a GOOD thing.

                Situation: We need feature X.
                People go and implement feature X in different ways, because not everyone agrees on one design, let's say implementations #1, #2 and #3 are created. Hence then we have multiple designs and implementations for feature X. Eventually, implementation #1 and #3 turn out to be sub-optimal, or lacking, and eventually almost everyone goes with implementation #2.

                With this approach, we are able to test multiple designs and implementations and pick out the best and most complete or extendable one(s) to survive.

                It happens all the time:
                - Tray icons (Xembed) vs. App-indicators vs. notification areas
                - Git vs. Mercurial vs. Bazaar
                - Upstart vs. systemd
                - Wayland vs. Mir vs. X
                - Different screen sharing protocols for Wayland compositors
                - etc...

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Weasel View Post
                  Why does wayland need to implement anything at all anyway?

                  Just let everyone make their own protocols and display servers/compositors with their own, incompatible, APIs.

                  That's the future. Why does Wayland even exist?
                  That's the stupidity

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by timofonic View Post

                    So how minimize works right now? Magic?



                    So how it works right now?



                    There's Waypipe in development. Any objections about it?



                    So what about this?

                    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Scree...ed_screencast_ tool

                    Why does wayland need to implement that?



                    Please elaborate.




                    So you complain about the issues of Wayland but not provide detailed information? Aren't you capable of making a complete post or you are as incomplete as Wayland?
                    Just because it took Gnome -decade- to reinvent basic functionality doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just because Gnome is ahead of other compositors in doing so doesn't mean the other compositors don't also need to do so.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by pal666 View Post
                      compositing window managers were invented for x11 before inception of wayland. wayland incorporated display server with window manager, that was its main selling point - to shorten roundtrips client->server->wm and back
                      what makes you think implementing policy is easier than implementing screen capture?
                      what makes you think implementation of sandbox is easier than implementation of screen capture?
                      you don't have to reimplement screen capture, you have to bind some keypress to piece of code calling some standard video codec. and isn't every desktop anyway is reimplementing every app in x11 mode? why reimplementing (screencapturing) apps is good, while reimplementing display servers is bad?
                      Damn, You're so badly misinformed....

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X