X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
1–10 of 318 posts
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#2(2017)
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#3(2017)
In 2017, a typo was fixed. The content is from 2013: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/wiki/xorg/log/Development/X12.m...
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#4Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#5Mind that the page describes a hypothetical update to X. In practical terms, Wayland is X12.
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#6Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2017, a typo was fixed. The content is from 2013: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/wiki/xorg/log/Development/X12.m...
Yet I'm still running X11, with Wayland still struggling and no X12 in sight.
Not sure it's fair to call it struggling when it's the default in just about every distro and has been smooth and stable for years.
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2017, a typo was fixed. The content is from 2013: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/wiki/xorg/log/Development/X12.m...
Yet I'm still running X11, with Wayland still struggling and no X12 in sight.
I've been running Wayland for years. It does everything X11 does at this point and is better in some ways.
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#9[flagged]
Re: X12: Requirements for a successor to the X11 protocol (2013)
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
In 2017, a typo was fixed. The content is from 2013: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/wiki/xorg/log/Development/X12.m...
Yet I'm still running X11, with Wayland still struggling and no X12 in sight.
I'm not up to date on the Linux desktop ecosystem. In what sense is Wayland struggling?