On Tue, 14 Sep 2021 15:21:58 +0600
NRK <nrk_AT_disroot.org> wrote:
Dear NRK,
> Adding to what Laslo has already said:
>
> I think it's laughable that that wayland devolopers claim wayland to
> be a replacement for X while actively ignoring many use-case and
> forcing their "perfect frame" philosophy onto the users.
>
> It is _OK_ if the devs prioritize having perfect frame and want to
> work on it more, I think we all want to work on features that are more
> valueable to us. But to actively discard other use-cases is _NOT_ ok.
>
> I for one have no regards to "perfect frame" and value a crisp low
> latency desktop without running any compositor. This is not possible
> in wayland but perfectly viable in X. Why should I have wayland dev's
> use-cases shoved down my throat? If I wanted to be pushed around by
> devs I'd use proprietary software instead.
>
> And it's also very funny that the devs (one of them atleast) think
> that instead of making wayland work for these users calling them
> "anti-vaxxers and flat-earters" is the way to go :)
>
> https://drewdevault.com/2021/02/02/Anti-Wayland-horseshit.html
good points. In open source, a solution should not shoehorn the users
into very tightly defined use-cases, but instead be flexible. X may be
a monstrosity, but it has shown that it's flexible enough (or rather
that enough work was put into it that it became that way).
Ad hominems against proper criticism are the lowest level in debate.
The gaslighting regarding Wayland wasted me a lot of time, as I'm told
or I read every year that _now_ would be the time to switch to Wayland.
But every time I do, my entire workflow breaks, and fixing it is
extremely hacky and fragile.
With best regards
Laslo
Received on Thu Sep 16 2021 - 08:26:27 CEST