It's still a technically bad decision. It gives no features, since the user will only see an X server, and it makes a greater bug surface. And, performance will not be better than it is with pure X.org, so what's the need to replace it before Mir is actually ready to be used natively? I said several times I'm not completely against Mir, but I'm against XMir as a platform for the desktop. Still, the cases where it brings problems shouldn't be ignored.Yes XMir is currently slower, but will be less so when it sees the light of day. Again what have they lost?
Being the most user-friendly one, lots of users are somehow 'forced' to use Mir. My friends are either on Ubuntu or on Windows, there's no other option for them. And I'd prefer to not to need to switch Ubuntu, but this is unlikely anyway since the flavor I use (Xubuntu) won't switch to Mir or XMir; if they change their plans at some point, I'll probably switch to Arch.1. They are being forced to use Mir against thier will (I see no evidence for this)
Nobody said so. They are probably the most able to get things right, since they are familiar to the inner works of display servers and know the X11 flaws in depth, but nothing else.2. That only wayland developers have the right to attempt to replace X (if so how did they get this right?)
I don't think anyone fears that. Even when they could be better on some areas, if they get different enough to, they will be better on some and worse on some other, like it happens with everything.3. Mir might turn out to be better than wayland and doom the project that you have spent so much time working on (again what evidence is there of this?)
Again, nobody is banning Canonical from doing nothing. We are stating our disagreement, and our reasons to. Something they didn't really. However, some of us, users and developers, would like to see a real reason to increase fragmentation, aside from "because we rulez".4. They have the right to dictate when and where fragmentation can and should occur (if so how did you get this right?)
When the problem is fragmentation, none of those solve anything, and the latter actually creates more problems.As with everything in the linux world, if you don't like it,don't use it, or fork it and make it better.
OK, so what do you want to discuss? Again, articles themselves aren't arguable about, because they reflect facts. Yes, XBMC got ported to both Wayland and Mir. That's it. Do you have anything to discuss about it? Go, see, the code is there, end of discussion. Everything else would be "off topic", aside from congratulating the developer. Then, you can state "I don't like XBMC because bla bla bla" or "I love it because foo", but it would be the same as the discussion about Mir and Wayland.Can threads that mention Ubuntu now go back to discussing what is in the article? It is tiring looking through the threads for interesting on topic discussion. There used to be much more of that.