Comment Why? (Score 3, Insightful) 226
What's wrong with Wayland that Mir fixes?
What else does Mir bring to the table that would make people use it over Wayland?
What is preventing Wayland from improving over the next 2 years?
If you want people to click on, read, and discuss articles, Slashdot, you should have articles worth clicking on, reading, and discussing.
I read TFA. Nothing in it answers the questions I have, not even the answer to the same fucking question that the interviewer had.
So that’s looking at Mir in relation to X. The obvious question is comparing Mir to Wayland – so what is it that Mir does, that Wayland doesn’t?
This might sound picky, but we have to distinguish what Wayland really is. Wayland is a protocol specification which is interesting because the value proposition is somewhat difficult. You’ve got a protocol and you’ve got a reference implementation. Specifically, when we started, Weston was still a test bed and everything being developed ended up in there.
No one was buying into that; no one was saying, “Look, we’re moving this to production-level quality with a bona fide protocol layer that is frozen and stable for a specific version that caters to application authors”. If you look at the Ubuntu repository today, or in Debian, there’s Wayland-cursor-whatever, so they have extensions already. So that’s a bit different from our approach to Mir, from my perspective at least.
There was this protocol that the Wayland developers finished and back then, before we did Mir and I looked into all of this, I wrote a Wayland compositor in Go, just to get to know things.