wayland is no better that Xegl ?

[darxus at chaosreigns.com]

On 06/17, microcai wrote:
>    So why don't we improve Xegl rather than renivent the wheel?

I think this is the best explanation of why X needs to be replaced, because
it's miserable to maintain:
http://julien.danjou.info/blog/2010/thoughts-and-rambling-on-the-X-protocol

"Xegl was said to be the future of Xgl...."
"Xgl was.... removed from the X.org server in favor of AIGLX on June 12, 2008."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xgl

So you may be interested to know that the creation of AIGLX was lead by
Kristian Høgsberg, the same guy behind Wayland.  


> wayland  is not compatible with X, while Xegl does.

What?  This is a video of early support of X clients with no knowledge of
Wayland, running under Wayland:
http://www.chaosreigns.com/wayland/demos/2012-05-03-xwayland.html


You haven't mentioned what your background is.  Maybe you know a lot about
X, Xgl, and Xegl.  Go ahead and make it better than Wayland, maintain it
well, and I'm sure everybody will use it instead of Wayland.  My
understanding is that's not worthwhile, Wayland will provide the same or
better user experience, and be far more pleasant to develop and maintain.
And that's why it's being created.

Network transparency is inevitable and expected to work better than X's due
to X's many unnecessary round trips, and most applications at this point
outputting pixmaps to the display server (X) anyway.

-- 
"I'd rather be happy than right any day."
- Slartiblartfast, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
http://www.ChaosReigns.com