Comment by bitwize

> People "stepped up"

If by "people" you mean a fascist who doesn't know how to program, then sure. But the sensible people who don't present a security threat with their politics or with shitty code are 100% in the Wayland camp.

> Also the people that used to maintain X11 (e.g. Keith Packard) had nothing to do with building Wayland.

Those people aren't maintaining X11 today, are they? The people who are maintaining X11 today have put it in bugfix-only mode and have told you, many times, that the future is Wayland. End of discussion.

Look, you want to run a retro 90s desktop for shits and giggles, that's great. There's even an officially supported path for this use case: Ariadne Conill's Wayback. But the DEs and the toolkits are all removing X11 support within the next year or two. There is no future there. You want to keep running modern software, you will have to switch to Wayland eventually—and soon.

> Wayland on the other is just a insanely stupid API. Everybody advocating for Wayland should be forced to write a simple client at least once without relying on behemoths like GTK or Qt.

Nobody actually develops applications that way. They all use a toolkit, and the behemoths cover pretty much 90% of actual application development (modulo things like Electron). Both of those, by the way, are deprecating X11 support.