Results 1 to 10 of 89

Thread: Canonical Announces Mir Back-End For Mainline Mesa

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Siekacz View Post
    Choose: Wayland with a lot of compromises, which require additional work to make it suit your needs and Mir which suits you perfectly. First solution requires a lot more work, because of conflicts in goals. Second needs a lot of work only at the beginning, but then much less - once you write it you have exactly what you want, and you don't need to worry about others. Wayland would never suit Ubuntu, because of shared code with others. Canonical would be blocked with a lot of things, just because they are "distro-specific".
    What compromises are those? Wayland works. There's tons of development already done on Wayland, it's on its way to becoming the standard for display servers for Linux. This is one part of the system where compatibility between distros is crucial. We need a single standard that we can all focus on, and Wayland is that because it has the support of the larger community, not just one distro. Everyone can make their own Wayland compositors if they want, but it's crucial that we all use the same standard. Just like it's fine that there are dozen and a half desktop environments, as long as they all play nice and are compatible to a reasonable degree. That's why there are standards which desktop environments follow. That's why you can take a program that's designed for KDE and run it in a GNOME environment, or vice versa.

    Canonical doesn't have the expertise to create this kind of standard. They will have to do way more work, and there's no way they'll get their project done before Wayland, because Wayland is way ahead of them. Canonical could easily just create their own Wayland compositor and still call it their own, add whatever extensions they need to suit their purposes, and it would benefit everyone because we'd all be using the same standard.

    Mir is goal-driven, not community-driven, what makes Mir development much faster. They don't need to wait on agreement on the community side to make things work.
    Empty buzzwords and marketing speak. Unfounded assumptions. Wayland developers actually know what they're doing and there's no way Mir is going to catch up on them any time soon. Besides, if you don't like community-driven development, what are you doing using Linux? Linux is based on community development. The Linux kernel is community-driven, it's developed by developers from all over the community. And it works great - it's the largest collaborative software project in the world, bringing us the most advanced, adaptable and flexible kernel in existence.

    Mir will be fully reusable with other DE's. Obviously, it will be designed to work with Unity, but it doesn't mean that running KDE or whatever won't be possible. What is Wayland designed for? Nothing.
    Wayland is designed for Linux, by Linux users. It is designed to work, with sound design principles and a clean codebase. Mir is just a twinkle in shuttleworth's eye at this point. What you don't get is that Wayland is a standard. There's absolutely no reason why Canonical couldn't create their own display server but make it conform to the Wayland standard. They'd still have control of the codebase if that's so crucial to them, they could add whatever extensions they wanted to support their distro-specific stuff, but they'd be working and collaborating with the ecosystem instead of fighting against it.
    Last edited by dee.; 03-10-2013 at 05:37 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •