The Wayland architecture integrates the display server, window manager and compositor into one process. You can think of Wayland as a toolkit for creating clients and compositors. It is not a specific single compositor or window manager. If you want a different window manager, you can write a new one.

I don’t know much about Wayland but the immediate question is: Why would you want to do that? If Wayland has it’s own window manager built in why do you need another one? It’s like support for Windows or OS X. Not needed as those systems have their own window managers and not really support replacing it. This is contrary to X which has no window manager by default and allows and encourages others to implement it. Window Maker is a window manager for X (as stated in the info box) and Wayland aims to be an incompatible replacement of X. So they are not really a good match at first sight.

source

now, they say - use wayland, it’s a new and good thing. this is a dealbreaker for me. i can’t live without windowmaker.

also, says

If Wayland has it’s own window manager built in why do you need another one?

wait, how? seriously? if there’s a one brand of bread, why would you need another one?

this is centralization again.

#quote #technology #wayland #xorg #linux #unix #windowmaker #design

բնօրինակ սփիւռքում(եւ մեկնաբանութիւննե՞ր)