Question about the future of Xorg

[Olivier Galibert]

The problems are the reasons why Wayland is inferior, e.g. the integration
of the window manager into the server (making customization so much more
difficult) and the balkanization that results from it.  X-the-protocol is
obsolete for sure, but Wayland still hasn't managed to recover the baby it
has thrown with the bathwater.

  OG.


On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 1:13 AM Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 8:27 AM Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > X wasn't "badly designed" per-say, for what it was I'll absolutely say
> it was a wonderful piece of software and it did its job well. But it's also
> designed for an era of computing that is much different than how most
> modern desktops work, so for a lot of the functionality we wanted to see in
> Wayland the only way to have implemented it in X would have required
> breaking people's setups. So, technically speaking splitting the
> development off was kind of a given in some sense anyway. Even if we didn't
> move work to Wayland it's more likely work would have been on an X server
> that didn't really resemble X11 and wasn't 1:1 compatible.
>
> You can list a million reasons why Wayland is superior, but people
> still use Xorg, and my bet is that's going to continue to be the case
> for at least a decade, and possibly much more.
>
> So if there are some users that will keep using Xorg, I would expect
> there to be some developers that will keep developing Xorg.
>
> But for some reason no one other than Enrico Weigelt has raised their
> hand and publicly stated so.
>
> --
> Felipe Contreras
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20250610/bb2d504a/attachment.htm>