wayland-protocols scope and governance

Drew DeVault sir at cmpwn.com
Sun Sep 22 03:57:45 UTC 2019

On Thu Sep 19, 2019 at 9:02 PM Jonas Ã…dahl wrote:
> I think that if there is a consensus that it's within the correct scope
> and no-one nacks it, there shouldn't need be any artifical bureaucratic
> road blocks in the way.

I mean, I'm not in any particular hurry to get any particular protocol
through the process. An implementation is a key part of the development
of a protocol and almost always reveals flaws in the protocol that a
human reading alone wouldn't. The difference between client and server
implementations can be similarly revealing, and it's nice to have more
people looking at a protocol with this degree of care.

However, I agree with your reasoning that multiple clients and a single
compositor still creates a system of stakeholders which would benefit
from this process. What if we required the sum of implementations
(client or server) to be 3 or more?

More information about the wayland-devel mailing list