Ubuntu moving towards Wayland
bdwheele at indiana.edu
Tue Nov 9 19:01:43 UTC 2010
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 13:47 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 12:12 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > > Remoting a wayland application is _trivial_. Either to an X or to a
> > > wayland view system. It's hard to make wayland remoting less flexible
> > > than X over the network, since the natural remoting level (surface
> > > updates) is basically stateless unlike X's sixteen complete IPC
> > > interfaces, and unlike X you're actually guaranteed that the window
> > > surfaces exist and have meaningful content. So you get the
> > > long-lusted-for "screen for X" almost for free.
> > One message ago you were saying that the network transparency concern
> > was a non-issue because GTK/QT apps would support both wayland and X.
> > Here you're saying that wayland will have network transparency?
> I'm Adam Jackson. That was Adam Williamson. We look a bit alike over
> ASCII I suppose, but in meatspace my hair is more likely to be
> interesting colors.
> And I'm saying you can get the network remoting effect you like in X, in
> Wayland. It's not built into the local Wayland rendering system, but
> there are both trivial ways to add it (vnc-like) and complicated ways to
> add it (rdp-like) and both will work.
So would it be a rooted VNC? If so, that simply sucks. The rdp style
is better, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it is going to be hit or
miss in different toolkits the same way that GUI/TUI admin tools are
always "kept in sync".
The truth is, I think this could be an interesting project, and I think
most people are raising their concerns now to make sure that should it
become a successful project we're not stuck with either VNC or
> - ajax
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
More information about the devel