Note: i don't actually think Canonical is lying about this, primarily because "discussing" means they are promising nothing and just saying they are trying to get something going. I'm just saying, if you think they're a bunch of liars it's not a huge leap of faith to think they could be lying about that as well.
I was almost certain Canonical said that they hadn't told anyone about Mir ahead of time. Including NVidia or AMD. That would mean the EGL driver in progress had to be targeting wayland, unless i'm wrong about that and they were told ahead of time.Probably Mir, as it was several months in development, before it was announced. That's what Canonical said and not neglected by NVidia/AMD.
Last edited by smitty3268; 06-16-2013 at 09:00 PM.
Nvidia evaluating adding Wayland support, and that was already a year ago (at that time, NVidia was obviously still not evaluating adding Mir support ).
But it's not a surprise, it has always been the case, and it's just what you'd expect from them: they are looking a what it will cost them to support something, and what they will gain, and when. Then they make decisions based on that. But until there is actual support, they'll never confirm anything. If you ask them about mir support, you'll get the same answer.
BTW, is there any write-up which deals with the complexity of an EGL driver for Wayland/Mir compared to an X driver?
AFAIK, some stuff is delegated to the driver, like multi-monitor handling.
OTHO, it sounds like a driver for Wayland/Mir is far easier to support for AMD/NVidia as you have not to deal
with all the 2d-cruft present/required for X (which causes many problems and burns lots of man hours, I guess).
Is this correct?
Last edited by entropy; 06-17-2013 at 05:56 AM.
But, as I see it, what you said is correct by the wrong causes. It doesn't need to deal with X specifics, which are an extra to the support they need to add just for running on Windows (which is their main target in general because of market share), but supporting 2D has nothing to do with the X specifics. I don't know if OpenGL and EGL deals with it, but some cards (I'm not sure if modern cards still ship it) have a 2D engine and it could be managed by a driver even with no X. The problem would be, in the case OpenGL and its derivatives doesn't deal with it, you need another generic interface.
About the complexity, I guess it's the same as an OpenGL driver, since AFAIK is a specification derived from it.
Furthermore, in relation to the KWin team, as I said before they have the right to rip out any code that introduces bugs and vulnerabilities as seen when they dumped their tiling window function much to the dismay of the community.
That said, it would be up to the Canonical team to supply those patches in the first place, but there should be no reason for the KWin team to reject those contributions outright simply because they're distro specific.
And an apology is an apology. Some people can be stubborn and not accept it, but that doesn't negate the fact that it exists.