Reasons that mean nothing to those of us that don't understand display servers and/or composting.
If you're going to complain about it, at least refute their specific technical reasons if you want your complaint to have any credibility.
I can't, and I don't think any of us meaningfully can unless there are some X, Wayland or Mir developers lurking around HN.
But I think the Wayland dev's google plus post [3] mailing list post [2] and IRC log [1] all give the impression that that list of reasons offered up by Ubuntu is, at least in part, bunk or could be addressed upstream in wayland. An upstream project that Ubuntu was already involved in for years and had the power to shape but never actually voiced their concerns when wayland's architecture didn't meet ubuntu's requirements. Ubuntu is free not to reveal the real reasons behind their decision, but unless they do the whole thing is dripping in Not Invented Here syndrome.
In fact, it seems like from the Wayland community, the problem isn't that Ubuntu is striking it out on their own, its that they're distributing a bunch of miss-understanding about Wayland in the process.
01:16 <RAOF [Ubuntu dev]> We're not forking wayland; that's part of what krh [Wayland lead] is annoyed with?
01:17 <Prf_Jakob> RAOF: he said he was annoyed with you having a wiki page full of missunderstandings of how wayland work.
Reasons that mean nothing to those of us that don't understand display servers and/or composting.
If you're going to complain about it, at least refute their specific technical reasons if you want your complaint to have any credibility.
I can't, and I don't think any of us meaningfully can unless there are some X, Wayland or Mir developers lurking around HN.
But I think the Wayland dev's google plus post [3] mailing list post [2] and IRC log [1] all give the impression that that list of reasons offered up by Ubuntu is, at least in part, bunk or could be addressed upstream in wayland. An upstream project that Ubuntu was already involved in for years and had the power to shape but never actually voiced their concerns when wayland's architecture didn't meet ubuntu's requirements. Ubuntu is free not to reveal the real reasons behind their decision, but unless they do the whole thing is dripping in Not Invented Here syndrome.
In fact, it seems like from the Wayland community, the problem isn't that Ubuntu is striking it out on their own, its that they're distributing a bunch of miss-understanding about Wayland in the process.
[1] http://pastebin.com/KjRm3be1[2] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2013-Mar...
[3] https://plus.google.com/100409717163242445476/posts