I’m a FOSS contributor myself and I know what it means to volunteer time and resources for the community. But the software needs to meet users in the middle.
The FOSS and Linux software scene is a meritocracy. Software rises to the top if it’s truly useful and “Don’t use it” in my experience is code-speak for “this software is a solution looking for a problem”.
The Nvidia hurdle in particular is insurmountable. They haven’t wavered in their stance on closed drivers in the last 20 years, they have no incentive to care about the Linux desktop, and yet they have 80% of this niche according to Steam. If Wayland intends to die on this hill it can order a headstone right now and save time.
But the software needs to meet users in the middle.
No, it doesn’t. No FOSS volunteer owes the users of their software anything.
“THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”” after all.
Your kind of views is exactly why the burn-out rate among FOSS developers has sky rocketed over the past years.
Wayland and really any free software is powered by volunteers and unless you compensate them in a reasonable way, you have no stakes and zero say in the matter. The fact that they listen to users and a community which largely doesn’t contribute is a gift, not an obligation.
If Wayland wants to be a hobby piece of software that scratches an itch for a couple of people, you’re perfectly correct.
If it wants to displace Xorg, one of the most widely used pieces of software in the community, it’s going to have to cater to the users’ needs. And I do mean needs; a working DE is not a whim.
They can’t act like the former and claim the latter. It just doesn’t work that way. What good is Wayland if it won’t work for the majority of people and will eventually languish in obscurity?
Then don’t switch. No one is forcing you to.
You seem to expect that people invest their time and energy, mostly unpaid, to validate your personal life choices. Frankly, I find that unreasonable.
I’m a FOSS contributor myself and I know what it means to volunteer time and resources for the community. But the software needs to meet users in the middle.
The FOSS and Linux software scene is a meritocracy. Software rises to the top if it’s truly useful and “Don’t use it” in my experience is code-speak for “this software is a solution looking for a problem”.
The Nvidia hurdle in particular is insurmountable. They haven’t wavered in their stance on closed drivers in the last 20 years, they have no incentive to care about the Linux desktop, and yet they have 80% of this niche according to Steam. If Wayland intends to die on this hill it can order a headstone right now and save time.
No, it doesn’t. No FOSS volunteer owes the users of their software anything. “THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED “AS IS”” after all. Your kind of views is exactly why the burn-out rate among FOSS developers has sky rocketed over the past years. Wayland and really any free software is powered by volunteers and unless you compensate them in a reasonable way, you have no stakes and zero say in the matter. The fact that they listen to users and a community which largely doesn’t contribute is a gift, not an obligation.
If Wayland wants to be a hobby piece of software that scratches an itch for a couple of people, you’re perfectly correct.
If it wants to displace Xorg, one of the most widely used pieces of software in the community, it’s going to have to cater to the users’ needs. And I do mean needs; a working DE is not a whim.
They can’t act like the former and claim the latter. It just doesn’t work that way. What good is Wayland if it won’t work for the majority of people and will eventually languish in obscurity?