On Tue, 2024-01-30 at 09:57 -0500, Steven A. Falco wrote:
On 1/30/24 08:55 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 08:38:51AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> > 3) Fedora has a long-standing and well-communicated stance that
> > we are
> > a Wayland distribution first and foremost and that X11 support is
> > intended as a migration-support tool rather than a first-class
> > citizen.
>
> Does it? This is very much news to me, so I don't think you can
> call
> it "well-communicated". We also have an XFCE desktop spin and
> probably others that require X11.
>
https://fedoraproject.org/uk/spins/xfce/
>
> In addition Wayland doesn't actually replace all the basic
> functionality of X11 even after all these years, which is why I
> need
> to use it.
I'm in the same boat. Back in September when this topic came up,
folks were invited to write bugs so the missing functionality could
presumably be worked on.
I wrote two bugs:
Bug 2239016 - Plasma(Wayland) does not honor window positioning when
setting window geometry
Bug 2239029 - Plasma(Wayland) does not save windows between sessions
For 2239016 the response was "That's just how wayland works" and for
2239029 someone added a reference to an upstream KDE bug (from 2021).
I realize that this is a volunteer-driven project, and that I cannot
expect someone to address the above wayland limitations, especially
since the wayland design philosophy appears to exclude such features.
But that doesn't change the fact that I need the missing
functionality, and based on how this discussion is going, I
personally doubt wayland will ever meet my needs.
I'm delighted that there are like-minded folks who want to maintain
X11. Please allow them to do so.
Steve
Steven, thank you for the serene explanations and for highlighting an
important point about waynland, wayland seems to miss some important
features.
> > 4) There was a comment on the FESCo ticket to the effect of
'"you
> > must
> > move to Wayland because no one maintains X11!". Here are some
> > people
> > who are maintaining X11 packages, so let them do their thing.'
> > This is
> > misleading, as the move to Wayland is specifically because the
> > upstream of X11 *itself* is largely unmaintained. These packages
> > are
> > not maintaining X11, they are adding new dependencies on it.
>
> They're maintaining parts of the X11 stack.
>
> > My proposal for consideration is this:
> > "FESCo will allow these packages in the main Fedora repositories,
> > however they may not be included by default on any release-
> > blocking
> > deliverable (ISO, image, etc.)"
>
> It seems quite strong. I'm unclear why having X11 packages and
> spins
> for those that want to use them is a problem. It seems like the
> missing functionality of Wayland is the bigger issue that needs to
> be
> addressed.
>
> Rich.
>
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
--
Sérgio M. B.