Re: [dev] Wayland st!!??

From: Carlos Torres <>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2013 09:33:48 -0400

Hi Michael.

On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Michael Forney <> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:17:42 -0400, Carlos Torres <> wrote:
>> I didn't know about this
>> I'm both excited or looking to troll
> I'm the author of the port.

I'm glad you were the first to answer, Kudos. wayland needs more
suckless. Keep on it and ignore the negative commentary. :-)

> I'm not sure how the suckless community
> feels about Wayland, but it seems like the core protocol is fairly
> lightweight, depends only on libffi, and is refreshing to work with
> compared to X.

you'll get varied reactions on the list. I for one am happy to see
the mingling between wayland and suckless stuff, since it potentially
exposes the suckless philosophy, whatever it may be.

> Weston's goals are perhaps more orthogonal to suckless,
> but I think there is potential for a suckless compositor.
> I don't really expect there to be a suckless Wayland environment for a
> while, and maybe something better will come around before there is, but
> I think my rendering library could be useful in either case (the Wayland
> part is just buffer creation/management and is separate from the
> rendering part).
> --
> Michael Forney <>

Received on Sun Jul 28 2013 - 15:33:48 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Jul 28 2013 - 15:36:06 CEST