On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 22:08:08 +0200 Silvan Jegen <s.je...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the goal of the Wayland devs is to keep the > required protocols to a minimum and graduate prooven protocol > extensions to official Wayland ones. It sounds good on paper, but really turns out to be a horrible mess in reality. > So theoretically, as long as you implement the Wayland protocol (and > it's assumptions) correctly, any compatible Wayland-speaking client > should work just fine. Yes, the clients are not the problem. We are talking about the compositor here. > Since Wayland is only a protocol, as long as both the client and the > server follow it closely enough both the clients and the server will > be happy. What is crucial is that the protocol is minimal and strictly > defined however. I am still cautiously optimistic that this is and > will be the case... It's not only about client-server interaction, it's about how you for instance should capture input in a compositor. You could use libinput, or a gazillion other libs out there with different levels of device support. I can already see the bug reports because this and that joystick, touchpad, whatever does not work in a specific compositor. And even clients have to do their own font-antialiasing. Sounds like a lot of fun! Please stop repeating the propaganda spread on the web, Wayland is not DoA without reason, and there is also a reason why nobody uses it nowadays other than to play around with it. It's a horrible mess and the wayland devs expect us to boil the ocean without any clear benefits at hand. Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>