By then, most applications and toolkits that use it will be absorbed by a GPL. Little reason to wait to be influenced heavily by another community.The way I see it, there is no reason to touch Wayland at least for another couple of years unless you want to debug issues. You should wait until it is widely adopted by mainstream Linux distributions. Eventually it would be forced upon us regardless of our opinion.
By then, most applications and toolkits that use it will be absorbed by a GPL. Little reason to wait to be influenced by another community.
FreeBSD should decide whether they want to use or abandon Wayland. Waiting for GNU to adopt and integrate it into every application, will put too much influence on Wayland and bloat surrounding toolkits and applications. I know that Xorg manages its own software independent of other licenses, and I have the same expectation from Wayland. Applications and toolkits surrounding Wayland to integrate it into Linuxisms will still become much more bloated: then if we want to use an application, we'll have to download and compile useless unused code, instead of the FreeBSD community stripping that down to directly access the X server. If a Linux community forked Wayland, then Wayland (with the exception of parts already integrated into Xorg implementations by then) becomes obsolete, it can't be used with much.What?
You're right. Let's wait for Linux to fix and influence it. Then, and only then we should adopt it.That's completely ridiculous opinion, I won't reply any further.
The way I see it, there is no reason to touch Wayland at least for another couple of years unless you want to debug issues. You should wait until it is widely adopted by mainstream Linux distributions. Eventually it will be forced upon us regardless of our opinion.
That's completely ridiculous opinion, I won't reply any further.
Of course you two agree, because you know absolutely nothing, and are likely Linux fanboys trying to justify that.
Waiting for them, lets them influence it, and leaves less room to influence it the way that fits efficiently with FreeBSD. It's that simple.
FreeBSD should decide whether they want to use or abandon Wayland. Waiting for GNU to adopt and integrate it into every application, will put too much influence on Wayland and bloat surrounding toolkits and applications. I know that Xorg manages its own software independent of other licenses, and I have the same expectation from Wayland. Applications and toolkits surrounding Wayland to integrate it into Linuxisms will still become much more bloated: then if we want to use an application, we'll have to download and compile useless unused code, instead of the FreeBSD community stripping that down to directly access the X server. If a Linux community forked Wayland, then Wayland (with the exception of parts already integrated into Xorg implementations by then) becomes obsolete, it can't be used with much.
Making the decision on whether GTK, KDE or Gnome work with Wayland is also a no-go in my opinion. When small desktops and toolkits work with it, then that would be a reason.
If you want to wait for something like that, you may as well abandon it now, or let them control influence to where it becomes a Linuxism, and deal with that headache later.
A few examples that apply, but have differences in their applications: OSS implementations that the one for FreeBSD got cleaned up for ports to use and graphics drivers.
I think what sidetone is trying to get across is that we should adapt Wayland now. Or at least as quickly as possible. That way we (read: FreeBSD) might able to influence any future direction Wayland will take. If we wait until Wayland is fully integrated into the Linux desktop we (read: FreeBSD) may never be able to get rid of all the Linuxisms that would inevitably creep in. By adapting it now we could potentially stop it from getting too Linux-centric in the first place.
Have plans to implement parts of it soon (as a little bit of it has been), or drop it. A little bit of Linuxism is ok, but for low level stuff, and displays, I don't think it should be saturated. For basic components, for example, there should be OSS or Sndio instead of Alsa, that later had to be fixed with more efficient drop-in support to OSS or Sndio. OSS has many implementations, and it took a while for the one from FreeBSD to be better recognized and fit with more ports. I wouldn't want to see Wayland be heavily influenced the way of Alsa, then FreeBSD later adopt it, because that would defeat the purpose of anything Wayland was intended to offer.
#include <X11/Xlib.h>
#define MAX(a, b) ((a) > (b) ? (a) : (b))
int main()
{
Display * dpy;
Window root;
XWindowAttributes attr;
XButtonEvent start;
XEvent ev;
if(!(dpy = XOpenDisplay(0x0))) return 1;
root = DefaultRootWindow(dpy);
XGrabKey(dpy, XKeysymToKeycode(dpy, XStringToKeysym("F1")), Mod1Mask, root,
True, GrabModeAsync, GrabModeAsync);
XGrabButton(dpy, 1, Mod1Mask, root, True, ButtonPressMask, GrabModeAsync,
GrabModeAsync, None, None);
XGrabButton(dpy, 3, Mod1Mask, root, True, ButtonPressMask, GrabModeAsync,
GrabModeAsync, None, None);
for(;;)
{
XNextEvent(dpy, &ev);
if(ev.type == KeyPress && ev.xkey.subwindow != None)
XRaiseWindow(dpy, ev.xkey.subwindow);
else if(ev.type == ButtonPress && ev.xbutton.subwindow != None)
{
XGrabPointer(dpy, ev.xbutton.subwindow, True,
PointerMotionMask|ButtonReleaseMask, GrabModeAsync,
GrabModeAsync, None, None, CurrentTime);
XGetWindowAttributes(dpy, ev.xbutton.subwindow, &attr);
start = ev.xbutton;
}
else if(ev.type == MotionNotify)
{
int xdiff, ydiff;
while(XCheckTypedEvent(dpy, MotionNotify, &ev));
xdiff = ev.xbutton.x_root - start.x_root;
ydiff = ev.xbutton.y_root - start.y_root;
XMoveResizeWindow(dpy, ev.xmotion.window,
attr.x + (start.button==1 ? xdiff : 0),
attr.y + (start.button==1 ? ydiff : 0),
MAX(1, attr.width + (start.button==3 ? xdiff : 0)),
MAX(1, attr.height + (start.button==3 ? ydiff : 0)));
}
else if(ev.type == ButtonRelease)
XUngrabPointer(dpy, CurrentTime);
}
}
A little bit of Linuxism is NOT possible.
It is like signing the death of tinywm
...
makes it money and will generally sh*t on anything that is in the way, regardless of how good it is.
So basically you say it is inevitable.
What I think will happen is that wayland will be deprecated at 80% market share, the replacement at 60% and then the grumpy old admins will dig out the old Xorg or even Xvesa to keep stuff running. And then people will marvel at the clean design and the light resource usage (comparatively, sure).
I think we'll be fine IMO. If it were important enough to the developers - they'd fork it or create an alternative. Case in point; bhyve. We had every chance to fully port over KVM or Xen, but we created our own solution, and look how far we've gotten since it was created. It actually turned out to be the better solution also.
I would totally back an audited xorg in base with the API/ABI promise that we FreeBSD offers. It'd make my life so much easier.