@david_chisnall @dvandal @strlcat @davidgerard@circumstances.run I have poured most hours of my last 10 years of life into listening to users and pushing things forward on Wayland even if I personally wouldn't need the feature. I really saddens me that someone would think that Wayland developers don't care.

We do care, but we only have a finite amount of time in our volunteer life. Yes, we don't copy-paste solutions from X11: we try to fully understand the problem space and do better. This does mean that coming to us with technical solutions rather than use-cases tends to be met with "please, explain why you need to do this?".

I don't really know what you mean when you say that we silence criticism. I've read enough in the past years to guarantee that it's not silenced. I appreciate constructive criticism better than rants, rants tend to demoralize me.

I am also saddened about the conspiracy that big corp deprecates X11 against the community's will. There is no single company with a monopoly here, please take a bit of time to look at Wayland developers' employers. Personally, I'm ex-SourceHut and now just a volunteer (my day job is unrelated: SNCF Réseau).

I've never said that X11 was deprecated, and I always tell people to use whatever works best for them. The only reason why X11 has less activity nowadays is because X11 lacks volunteers. (We severely lack volunteers on the Wayland side too.)

People, distros, communities move away from X11 if/when they collectively decide that they should. Nobody's pulling the strings here.

@dvandal @strlcat @davidgerard

Wayland and systemd are both symptoms of the same behaviour, as was PulseAudio:

• Observe that an existing system has flaws.
• Don't engage with users to identify use cases.
• Throw up some half-finished code (with incomplete or nonexistent backwards compatibility) that solves some of the problems of the old system but doesn't address all of its use cases and introduces more problems for other people.
• Declare that the old thing is deprecated and everyone needs to move to the new thing.
• Create a load of work in the rest of the ecosystem that other people have to do.
• Silence all criticism by pointing out that the old thing was imperfect.

And that's the kind of thing that you can only get away with if you're able to act as a monopoly, by employing maintainers at key points across the ecosystem.

The biggest problem with Microsoft was not that their monopoly allowed them to be evil, it was that it allowed them to be stupid. A lot of things in the MS ecosystem are actually bad for Microsoft, but they're pushed out because no one inside MS cares enough to do the right thing and no one outside is able to fix the problems. I, personally, don't want the F/OSS OS ecosystem to end up like that.