... and not one directed at canonical's choices (single process wm-shell design, programming language, programming method, etc), rather bashing them for the decision itself
it strikes me odd somehow, especially after hearing about this "freedom" thing for a long time now... oh nevermind...
Originally Posted by dee.
Wayland is the right way to do things, and sometimes doing things right takes time. Mir is nothing but vaporware at this point.
you may be right on the latter (but know knows, canonical isnt new to skunk works)
but about the former who says Wayland is THE way?
with the most respect for wayland developers and their efforts, but to any problem in sw design, every individual developer may have a different solution and all may be equally valid
the fact that different developers may have different requirements or different approaches, know different languages (and here it's about a C++ monolithic shell+wm+graphic server vs a protocol and a C component for building compositors, with third parties tasked with the latter), follow different methodologies (and ehre it's about test driven development) or have different conceptions, is enough to set the respective solutions apart yet make them equally worthy
the mere fact that Mir is to be developed via TDD can make a HUGE difference development- and possibly functionality-wise, if applied correctly of course
because if applied correctly, it could mean more rapid development times (thus it may be actually possible for an Agiile developed integral solution to be delivered sooner)
because it would mean that the DS's behaviour is already formalized and apriori tested (with corner cases checked, and thus known to work correclty, apriori rather than as afterthought) the moment the code is released - thus Mir would be a formally verified desktop shell (afaik the first ever actually), thus suitable for environments where preverified code is practically mandatory (or the alternative is extensive and expensive auditing before deployment)
with Wayland, if i'm not mistaken, you dont get this - so this alone may make the whole wayland thing unsuitable for those who require, or strive for it
Originally Posted by ninez
Canonical didn't even try to have any issues they may have had with Wayland addressed.
in the light of the above, if wayland didnt fulfill canonical's aim or requirements maybe it wasnt a no-go in and of itself
but if you have to solve a development problem and stumble upon a non viable solution (or one you deem as such anyway), do you bend to adopt it anyway (knowing and accepting you'll have to make compromises) or do you skip on it directly and implement yours without being restricted by others' choices?
if you do the latter, do you think you have to answer anyone about your decisions or not?
this is a new fucking world where tech is moving fast, you can't take 5 years to make a gay display manager for fucks sake.
You have swallowed the Canonical marketing hook, line & sinker. Mir is only at the level Wayland was ~3 years ago, and there's no realistic way they can accomplish their tasks (with the developers listed) in a single year. Most likely the only reason they could accomplish what they did in 9 months is because they are walking on the path Wayland paved.
ok erendorn, using a bit of logic, tell me why that happened?
canonical is not afraid of buggy code so had wayland been anything but a pile of hype and promises I'm sure canonical would have either forked the shit out of it like they did with gnome, or end up using it.
seriously, use logic people:
why would canonical waste resources, time and money, making something if they could have just forked an existing solution?
I believe canonical lacks leadership, management, vision and a business plan but they would have to be text book retard to pull a move like this if wayland was anything but a piece of shit.