Man, in only there were a way to have all essential features in a centralized Wayland server, with compositors only handling window management instead of everything including copy/paste or global hotkeys… Alas, the technology just isn’t there yet.
I’ll quote myself, as you didn’t seem to have read it:
They can’t just log all your keystrokes globally because that’d be a keylogger. Also there’d be no way to resolve conflicts between shortcuts.
Go ahead, tell the X devs that their new protocol is worse than the old. That, instead of improving on things and creating a thing that won’t become unmaintainable, they fucked up royally and made things worse. I’m waiting.
If you want to go and continue maintaining X then go ahead, noone’s stopping you.
Or maybe you accept that the people who have been maintaining it for decades know a thing or two about the thing, and you’re just whining from the sidelines.
A hypothetical Wayland server could implement the same protocol, so apps would talk to it instead of to the compositor, which would then focus on managing windows instead of implementing all of Wayland.
I’m not sure what you mean with “all of wayland”, here. The protocol is ludicrously small and minimal. It’s a way for programs to say “I have a graphics buffer, please display it and also give me some input like mouse motions plz”. Everything else is extensions because there’s devices (e.g. in automotive) that need only that, and nothing more, no windowing no nothing. You certainly don’t need global hotkey handling if all you ever run is one full-screen client.
Whether the compositor wants to implement windowing logic (say, tiling vs. floating, what happens when you right-click a titlebar) itself or outsource that to another process is not wayland’s concern.
KDE didn’t go that way because kwin was already an integrated compositor and window manager when it only ran on X, the smaller projects do seem to tend into that direction but they haven’t agreed on a common standard, yet.
Global hotkey handling, copy and paste, screenshots, etc are part of the protocol but need to be implemented by every compositor. X is better for this; the server handles all of this and delegates window management to the WM.
I think you should double-check what I linked to: To the xdg desktop protocols, that’s a dbus thing, it’s not a wayland extension much less the core wayland protocol. It’s the same protocol flatpack apps use to do stuff, figures that APIs that are useful if you’re in a sandbox are useful in general.
X does not handle global hotkeys. It gives everyone full access to everything and then expects them to not fight for control, which took decades to actually happen, before that the desktop would often break down as clients were fighting. Any client can warp the pointer, capture all keys, watch how you enter a password in another window, say it’s the one which should be on top of all the others, it’s a nightmare.
Judging by the types of misunderstanding you have I must assume that you’ve never written a single line of X or wayland related code. Know, therefore, that you are completely unqualified to hold the opinion you have, much less hold it strongly.
Man, in only there were a way to have all essential features in a centralized Wayland server, with compositors only handling window management instead of everything including copy/paste or global hotkeys… Alas, the technology just isn’t there yet.
I’ll quote myself, as you didn’t seem to have read it:
Go ahead, tell the X devs that their new protocol is worse than the old. That, instead of improving on things and creating a thing that won’t become unmaintainable, they fucked up royally and made things worse. I’m waiting.
If you want to go and continue maintaining X then go ahead, noone’s stopping you.
Or maybe you accept that the people who have been maintaining it for decades know a thing or two about the thing, and you’re just whining from the sidelines.
org.freedesktop.portal.GlobalShortcuts allows apps to request a global shortcut binding from the compositor.
A hypothetical Wayland server could implement the same protocol, so apps would talk to it instead of to the compositor, which would then focus on managing windows instead of implementing all of Wayland.
I’m not sure what you mean with “all of wayland”, here. The protocol is ludicrously small and minimal. It’s a way for programs to say “I have a graphics buffer, please display it and also give me some input like mouse motions plz”. Everything else is extensions because there’s devices (e.g. in automotive) that need only that, and nothing more, no windowing no nothing. You certainly don’t need global hotkey handling if all you ever run is one full-screen client.
Whether the compositor wants to implement windowing logic (say, tiling vs. floating, what happens when you right-click a titlebar) itself or outsource that to another process is not wayland’s concern.
KDE didn’t go that way because kwin was already an integrated compositor and window manager when it only ran on X, the smaller projects do seem to tend into that direction but they haven’t agreed on a common standard, yet.
Global hotkey handling, copy and paste, screenshots, etc are part of the protocol but need to be implemented by every compositor. X is better for this; the server handles all of this and delegates window management to the WM.
I think you should double-check what I linked to: To the xdg desktop protocols, that’s a dbus thing, it’s not a wayland extension much less the core wayland protocol. It’s the same protocol flatpack apps use to do stuff, figures that APIs that are useful if you’re in a sandbox are useful in general.
X does not handle global hotkeys. It gives everyone full access to everything and then expects them to not fight for control, which took decades to actually happen, before that the desktop would often break down as clients were fighting. Any client can warp the pointer, capture all keys, watch how you enter a password in another window, say it’s the one which should be on top of all the others, it’s a nightmare.
Judging by the types of misunderstanding you have I must assume that you’ve never written a single line of X or wayland related code. Know, therefore, that you are completely unqualified to hold the opinion you have, much less hold it strongly.