Ubuntu moving towards Wayland

[Dennis Jacobfeuerborn]

On 11/06/2010 04:16 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote:
>>>> Out of interest, do you use individual shells/terms or something that
>>>> provides a more remote desktop like experience?
>>>
>>> I use ssh -Y.  Anything that sits in a huge window showing an entire
>>> desktop-in-a-desktop is so obviously the wrong way to do it, from both
>>> a usability and efficiency perspective, that I'm just astonished that
>>> people suggest I use something like VNC.
>>
>> We use both approaches, I suppose both have their merits, and we
>> shouldn't rule out either method of working.
>>
>> -Cam
>> --
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
> One of the many concerns I have with Wayland involves VNC.  Right now
> VNC on X uses some of the multiuser functions to enable multiple VNC
> consoles.  Will Wayland still allow for this or will we be back to
> Windows with only one VNC session per computer.  Linux/Unix is
> designed around multiuser/multisession, I believe we would be amiss to
> remove those capabilities from the OS.
>

First I think you should probably head over to the Wayland mailing list and 
get involved there. That's something I also recommend to Richard because if 
you want certain features to be present now is a good time to make your 
voices heard over there. That's the reason I brought the topic up in here 
so people can have a discussion over what the requirements are to make this 
work well with Fedora as a project and then push for inclusions of these 
requirements in Wayland.

Second I am a bit surprised by the "unless feature X is implemented 1:1 we 
shouldn't allow progess" sort of argument that is going on here.
The main reason I'm excited about Wayland is the fact that it creates 
competition. I agree with Camilo that X doesn't seem to cope with the 
requirements of modern desktops well and I believe the reason for that is
the fact that in the absence of a competitor it's very easy to settle for 
"good enough". Yes X is good enough for basic desktop especially after the 
great improvements that happened after the Xorg split but being good enough 
doesn't really jive well with Fedoras claim of being a showcase for 
technical innovation. I've lurked on the Xorg mailing list long enough to 
see the various attempts of improving X being stomped by the fact that 
compatibility with decade old protocols that no one really cares about on a 
modern desktop must be maintained.

The fact that X can be run as a client on Wayland makes for a pretty 
perfect situation in my eyes. Wayland can make design decision unhampered 
by the past while people who rely on specific X features can keep using 
these applications without change. If the advantages of Wayland weigh so 
heavily then X will at some point be obsoleted. I these advantages don't 
materialize then Wayland will disappear and we will return to X. But a 
third possible outcome - and one that in my opinion is pretty likely to 
occur - could be that a lot of the features of X (like remote applications) 
will actually be implemented in Wayland precisely because they have enough 
merit to survive and that looks like a great future to me: a modern 
implementation of all the features we love and care about.

As for the "if all apps are ported to Wayland I will not be able to use 
them remotely anymore" I think this is bogus. Nowadays virtually all 
application aren't X application but gtk/qt applications and the toolkits 
tend to support different backends. So you will be able to use your apps as 
long as the toolkits support X and I think that's going to be a long time 
unless Wayland is dramatically successfull.

Regards,
   Dennis