X.Org Server Development Hits A Nearly Two Decade Low

[Bigon]

Not if you install via the CD that comes with Xfce.

Basically it only comes with Gnome. If you install Gnome; you get Wayland. If you install anything else; you don't.

The default desktop, of the default installer uses wayland by default

[ssokolow]

ssokolow The NIHed compositors have been warned. You can’t stop them getting a rope and tie a noose..

I just hope Redhad doesn't bring the whole ecosystem down by throwing all their eggs in the NIHed compositor's basket.

GNOME is a project founded on NIHing KDE. (Originally on Qt license zealotry, later mixing in anti-C++ zealotry based mostly in now-obsolete complaints about GCC's implementation of it, then on crashy-for-far-too-long reinventions of things like KIOSlaves (GnomeVFS) and retired attempts to replicate things like KParts.)

It's fundamentally a "haters desktop" (the link talks about the problems in TDE's approach to forking KDE 3.5. I'm reminded of previous Phoronix coverage of Devuan.) with all the associated downsides of duplicated work and a higher chance of being unwilling to cooperate in situations where it would benefit everyone.

I'm just glad that they agreed to retire their use of CORBA in favour of D-Bus (a cooperatively designed successor to KDE's DCOP) and managed to cook up something truly worthwhile in the GObject Introspection (GIR) system.

(I'll readily admit that GIR is something GNOME beat KDE to, which the Qt company should either use or NIH as long as they do something to catch up to GNOME on that front with the QWidget APIs.)

[ssokolow]

ssokolow Qt license problem exist today. CLA is a no-go. There’s no NIH just a sane approach to deal with license trolls.

Avoid, avoid, avoid.

Nice job avoiding my point that it's about the history of anti-social psychology that underlies the GNOME development effort and the recurring detrimental patterns it produces by fixating on the one example which you know how to hit back against.

Read that "haters desktop" link. It gives good examples of compaing apples (TDE) to apples (the KDE 3.5 enterprise (LTS) branches) to show how the psychology of the TDE developers hurts it.

[Vistaus]

I wish DE's would adopt Arcan already instead of trying to hack their sloooowww way into Wayland...

[tildearrow]

ssokolow There’s no psychology involved here. Avoiding CLA license trolls is a prerequisite for good engineering and legal practice.

Qt was never a valid candidate as a truly free toolkit or a truly free community. So GNOME was never NIHing..

Me tienes cansado con esa estupidez de "CLA".

*sigh* Come on, stop picking on Qt over a "CLA".

[tildearrow]

I wish DE's would adopt Arcan already instead of trying to hack their sloooowww way into Wayland...

Reinventing the Wheel (I mean, rewriting whole desktop environments to cope with the Arcan protocol)


No, thanks. Why doesn't Arcan implement/support Wayland?

[Vistaus]

Reinventing the Wheel (I mean, rewriting whole desktop environments to cope with the Arcan protocol)

But unlike Wayland, Arcan reached feature-parity with Xorg quite some time ago, so it's much easier to port DE's because it's much more complete than Wayland in its current state.

[ssokolow]

Reinventing the Wheel (I mean, rewriting whole desktop environments to cope with the Arcan protocol)


No, thanks. Why doesn't Arcan implement/support Wayland?

My understanding is that it does... it just has a Microkernel-like architecture where Wayland support is a separate process called waybridge and the Arcan protocol isn't intended to be adopted by toolkits. (The article I linked also talks about how it's part of Arcan's strategy for allowing Wayland applications to survive compositor crashes by having waybridge act sort of like GNU Screen.)

[ssokolow]

ssokolow There’s no psychology involved here. Avoiding CLA license trolls is a prerequisite for good engineering and legal practice.

Qt was never a valid candidate as a truly free toolkit or a truly free community. So GNOME was never NIHing..

Again, fixating on that one point you can dispute. Back in the GNOME 2.x days, GNOME was rather infamous for refusing KDE offers to write C bindings for lower-level infrastructure stuff where Qt was either optional or not a dependency and explicitly saying it was because they were refusing to depend on C++.

[ssokolow]

ssokolow Again. Qt is not an option. C bindings won’t change that.

I repeat:

1. KDE developers were offering to make C bindings for lower-level infrastructure stuff where Qt was either optional or not a dependency
2. GNOME developer were explicitly saying it was because they were refusing to depend on C++

Please read the comments you're responding to.