undefined | Better HN

0 pointszajio1am5y ago0 comments

> On the contrary, Wayland is very much in the spirit of Unix & Linux philosophy, while X11 isn't.

I have an opposite view. X11 has two key aspects separated to two independent entities: mechanism (in Xserver) and policy (in window manager). This has and advantage as neutral mechanism can be shared by everybody (Xorg), while everyone has different opinion about policies (many WMs).

Wayland assumes integration of compositor (mechanism) and WM (policy) to one entity.

0 comments

1 comments · 1 top-level

dralley5y ago

> I have an opposite view.

All I can say is that nearly every single one of the former core Xorg developers has said precisely the opposite (sometimes in literal terms [0] [1]), and has switched to developing Wayland.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWQh_DmDLKQ&t=27m44s

[1] https://community.kde.org/KWin/Wayland

> In Plasma we need Wayland support as we are hitting the limitations of X all the time. Wayland will simplify our architecture and allow us to composite the screen in the way we consider as most useful.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse