31–40 of 208 posts
https://github.com/ocornut/imgui/wiki/Multi-Viewports
This is a feature available on Windows, macOS, and of course X11. Making choices like this means desktop Linux becomes even more of a weird island that nobody wants to support.
As a naive user who largely hasn't had any issue with it. Is Wayland that bad?
> But Wayland is just broken, and everyone would rather sit around arguing with each other instead of actually addressing the design flaws.
> It's not the first time such a proposal has been put forward. Something that developers need for their applications to work properly on WL (particularly multi-window applications), and it gets vetoed. Every other OS manages this fine. But apparently we're in the wrong for not conforming to some warped view of how applications should be, despite our applications working fine on every other platform.
This is so damn true. Wayland lacks a Linus-style BDFL saying that the kern... the compositor is for applications, and not the other way around. We won't have nice things until Wayland maintainers stop thinking about what their end users must or must not do, and start closing feature gaps with X and compositors/window managers on other OSes. Right now they're reinventing the wheel while making it square.
Actions like this will just hurt Wayland in the long run. It needs more users, and for that more applications that support it by default. No one will bring X11 to the level of Wayland, but someone might fix the existing Wayland problems.
Until these issues are ironed out, it's delusional to think that making Wayland the default will make users happy. Keep it as an experimental feature, and once it provides an objectively better experience for everyone, make it the default.
These technical discussions by folks in the trenches often miss the forest for the trees. Users don't care that X11 is difficult to support, develop and maintain. They just want a working system. By the looks of it from this GH issue, Wayland is also a pain for developers. What a sad state of affairs for Linux.
Further down: >... it is disabled on our release builds, because it's nothing but headaches for us, because of its broken by design nature causing issues for users. I listed a bunch of them in the OP as well. >We're sick of getting blamed for bugs in wayland compositors, while the various committees sit around arguing with each other, finally decide on standard ways of doing things after half a decade, then GNOME rui…
Linux in general... Think of the efforts wasted in duplicate/overlapping functionality between maintenance + development of distributions, package managers, shells, compilers, C libraries, desktop environments, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is about X vs Wayland, not Windows vs Linux.
It's about the GPU used in regular laptops, I'd imagine, for which Windows has drivers and support, and Linux does not. That's my point. X11 for those laptops works more reliably, but even then there's immense screen tearing, blurry texts, broken fractional scaling, etc. I just don't know why I would ever use software of this quality when even Windows XP had less issues like this in its hayday, and it released 20 yea…
Actions like this will just hurt Wayland in the long run. It needs more users, and for that more applications that support it by default. No one will bring X11 to the level of Wayland, but someone might fix the existing Wayland problems.
Not sure it will do anything to hurt Wayland. The app will just run in XWayland which is mostly impossible to tell between a native Wayland app for users.
> Stupid obsession with CSD in Gnome
I get why GNOME devs don't wanna implement it (most of the times looks out of place for the app, or the app looks out of place to the system if it doesn't use the system toolkit, so it's just better for them to roll something that looks good for the app) and the XWayland implementation for SSDs are still a holdover that would need to be ported that they don't want to do. But then again to my knowledge QT has a way to make a header bar (I think even one in GTK style) and there is libdecor that handles headerbars.
> Inability to position windows
xdg-session-management is being worked to handle restoring of window positions. There are some contensious extensions being discussed about other window placements but they are still very much in flux. I personally am impartital for the actual use of the features and if they are really that necessary.
> Hacks in render-to-main because WL craps itself otherwise
This sounds more like a problem with the project itself than wayland considering the meriad of other things able to work, but then again its an emulator that might be doing some very weird stuff so I can't say much about it.
> Despite said hacks, game list still glitches after stopping emulation, happens more often in gnome
Probably a cascading problem from the previous
> NVIDIA just crashes in swap chain creation under Wayland
Not exactly too surprised, although my laptop with Intel/NV hybrid has been working mostly fine for my mostly basic usage.
> Broken global menus
Those are a thing anywhere other than OSX? How do they handle this on Windows?
FWIW all the reasons seem like an aversion to complying with how Wayland works. Yes, you can't position windows absolutely, but that's because you're not supposed to do that. In any case I don't see how being able to position windows is relevant at all to PCXS2's functioning on Wayland? Just don't position windows if you can't? It's an incredibly dumb reason not to support the protocol. Xorg is mostly unmaintained AF…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Linux in general... Think of the efforts wasted in duplicate/overlapping functionality between maintenance + development of distributions, package managers, shells, compilers, C libraries, desktop environments, etc.
Unfortunately that's not avoidable. The duplication exists because of disagreement regarding how things should be done. The alternative is not "my preferred project gets all the resources" but "my preferred project doesn't exist and all the resources go to some fundamentally flawed project that I don't want to use". See Windows or macOS for how that turns out.
Is there too high a level of this disagreement in open-source software? Should it be called out from the perspective of "please try to use your time more effectively instead of contributing to fragmentation because it's harmful to the ecosystem from a macro perspective"?