| |
| ▲ | 0x1ch 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | Is the conflict of interest in the room with us? Every major distribution has greenlit Wayland and introduced into their stable releases as the default. X11 is not actively developed, a fork is. | | |
| ▲ | necovek 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > X11 is not actively developed, a fork is. That's a weird framing. Original X was forked as XFree86 and included in all the major distributions. Xorg was a fork of XFree86, and subsequently included in all the major distributions when some devs/sponsors wanted to take it in a different direction. XLibre — if that's what you are referring to — is another fork in a long line of forks. So when you say X11 is not being developed but a fork is, which one are you referring to? | | |
| ▲ | 0x1ch 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | Weird framing is injecting decades old semantics to an issue most people already understand as X11 vs Wayland. Since everyone has defaulted to X11/Xorg prior to Wayland, it is known as xorg and x11... Not that fork of "XFree86". X11 and Xorg, as we know it, are not in active development but maintenance mode. They have planned to wind down for a while, and this has been old news for over six years now... The code rollback and freeze inquiries should've signaled people off. |
| |
| ▲ | torstenvl 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You seem to be confused between X11 as a protocol (and, used loosely, its many implementations) and a specific X11 server. Within the Linux community, the primary X11 implementation has been the XFree86 server, which forked into XOrg over licensing disputes, which forked into XLibre over the development roadmap. Other implementations include XQuartz (also based on XOrg) and Xlibe (not a traditional server but implements X11 by translating into native Haiku graphics API calls). There's also Xming and android-xserver (written in Java!), among many others. XOrg may be abandoned. That doesn't mean the entire ecosystem is. | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > X11 is not actively developed, a fork is. Xorg is not actively developed. X11 is fine. | | |
| ▲ | 0x1ch 17 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Both are in maintenance mode? Red Hat and Canonical made their calls, and basically every other desktop environment outside of their control as well. Some were late, but are now here. Outside of legacy systems, I just don't see why people are going out of their way to get back on X11/Xorg outside of perceived FOSS politics and posturing. See - XLibre code of conduct and the Arch fiasco. | | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Red Hat and Canonical made their calls, and basically every other desktop environment outside of their control as well. Thankfully, that's not really how open source ecosystems work. There are still people interested in both using and developing X11. > Outside of legacy systems, I just don't see why people are going out of their way to get back on X11/Xorg outside of perceived FOSS politics and posturing. Well, when Wayland supports the features that people use on X11 I suppose we can discuss it. As of the present day, moving "forward" to Wayland would mean massive regressions in a11y tools that I'm not willing to give up just yet, and accepting a fragmented landscape where questions like "how do I change the keyboard layout" or even "is it possible to change the keyboard layout to anything but us+qwerty" are "It Depends™, what compositor do you use" (because Wayland deeply believes in reinventing the wheel over and over again, forever). |
| |
| ▲ | Gabrys1 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Isn't X11 a protocol (and version 11 at that)? Being a protocol doesn't mean it can't be actively developed (look at HTTP at least), but if it's good it doesn't NEED to | | |
| ▲ | yjftsjthsd-h 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, X11 is a protocol, which is still slowly developed by adding extensions to it. Whether it does or doesn't need to be actively developed is a question of what features you do or don't think it needs. |
|
|
|
|
