| |||||||||||||
Why not WaylandWhy not WaylandPosted Mar 4, 2013 23:04 UTC (Mon) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198)Parent article: Canonical reveals plans to launch Mir display server (The H)
under Why Mir?
> X's input model is complex and allows applications to spoof on input events they do not own. On the one hand, this raises serious security concerns, especially regarding mobile platforms. On the other hand, adjusting and extending X's input model is difficult and supporting features like input event batching and compression, motion event prediction together with associated power-saving strategies or flexible synchronization schemes for aligning input event delivery and rendering operations is (too) complex.
and under Why not Wayland
> The input event handling partly recreates the X semantics and is thus likely to expose similar problems to the ones we described in the introductory section.
? likely ?
This is being described like the person is not intimately familiar with Wayland but has heard that in many ways its like X so they are making assumptions and can't make a definitive statement on what does or doesn't fit their perceived needs. That seems like a bad basis for making such an important decision, maybe they should talk to the Wayland designers and see if their needs can be met (software can be changed!) before redoing all of this work, poorly.
(Log in to post comments)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 4, 2013 23:07 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
Atleast some of the assumptions they make are wrong. It shouldn't be much of a surprise at this point but they haven't talked to the developers involved either.
https://plus.google.com/100409717163242445476/posts/jDq6B...
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 4, 2013 23:28 UTC (Mon) by jubal (subscriber, #67202) [Link]
(I've read that google+ thread, interesting. Nb. I wouldn't be surprised if there would be much more upstart installations than systemd-based ones, especially as upstart is used by chromebooks; also, seeing Mr. Pöttering complaining about heavy-handed approach made my day.)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 0:48 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
That thread wasn't about systemd. Lennart has a confrontational style but responds very well to technical arguments and avahi, pulseaudio and systemd adoption across distros remains very high because people are convinced of the merits. Strong opinions doesn't equate to heavy handedness. The problem is not that one creates alternatives but when the description as to why is weak.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 1:12 UTC (Tue) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]
Poettering is spelled just like that; there is no Umlaut involved.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 1:41 UTC (Tue) by mezcalero (subscriber, #45103) [Link]
Indeed. Umlauts are for suckers. A true Poettering is written with "oe" instead. After all, I am not a Metal band.
To make this point I even invested my hard-earned money in this page:
(You need some German language skills to grok that ;-))
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 3:42 UTC (Tue) by leightonbrown (subscriber, #6264) [Link]
so.... is X next on your list:)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 7:02 UTC (Tue) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
By "oe" you mean "œ"? So Pœttering? :)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 9:49 UTC (Tue) by micka (subscriber, #38720) [Link]
I'm not familiar with german, but if it's oe it's oe not œ (same thing the other way).
In french, we have words that are written œ like cœur and other that are written oe like moelleux.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 12:34 UTC (Tue) by chithanh (guest, #52801) [Link]
In German you don't have many ligatures. The only widespread one is ß which is a ligature of ſs or ſʒ depending on your font. And this ligature is even not used when the letters are in capitals or at the beginning of a word (like in "Szene"). A capital version of the ligature(ẞ) is now adopted in Unicode but has been mostly ignored so far.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 22:06 UTC (Tue) by andreasb (subscriber, #80258) [Link]
The German umlauts originated from the 'ae', 'oe' and 'ue' combinations. Instead of contracting them to something like 'æ', a small 'e' was written above the first letter and over time was reduced to two short lines/dots.
So basically œ and ö have similar origins and only diverged through different typographic traditions.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 7:41 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
very interesting, thanks. :)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 9:19 UTC (Wed) by tnoo (subscriber, #20427) [Link]
> a small 'e' was written above the first letter
In old German handwriting, the lowercase "e" was just two parallel, slightly inclined lines, with connecting ligatures to the letters before and after. Thus these are two vertical lines or two dots in today's handwriting, and two dots in almost all typesetting.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 16:39 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
Oh, and that then means Poettering *can* be written equivalently and correctly as Pöttering? :)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 17:28 UTC (Wed) by jwakely (subscriber, #60262) [Link]
So he *is* a heavy metal band? This is all very confusing.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 18:05 UTC (Wed) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] You're supposed to use »oe« if the person spells their name with »ö« but you can't use the umlaut (air travel tickets come to mind). If a person spells their name with »oe« to begin with (as in »Poettering«), substituting »ö« would be considered a mis-spelling. The general assumption is that if they spell their name like that, they prefer it like that, and it is a matter of common courtesy (rather than linguistics) to go along. So, no equivalence.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 18:14 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
In this case yes, but I don't think it's universally true.
Cheers,
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 19:30 UTC (Wed) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]
> > Oh, and that then means Poettering *can* be written equivalently and correctly as Pöttering?
> In this case yes No. Please read the thread. He says himself that Pöttering is not a correct spelling: https://lwn.net/Articles/541159/ mezcalero is Poettering's nickname on lwn, in case you weren't aware.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 20:51 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
woosh... ;) (my comment was written in full awareness of that comment)
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 20:46 UTC (Wed) by andreasb (subscriber, #80258) [Link]
As mentioned, 'ö' is expandable to 'oe' when you can't write umlauts for some reason. The inverse isn't necessarily true (can't come up with examples though) and especially not for names.
Names are spelled the way they have "always" been spelled and do not have to match current orthography. For example, someone called Schmidt, Schmid, Schmitt or any other variation can not simply be "corrected" to Schmied (smith) even though that's the current spelling.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 8, 2013 1:34 UTC (Fri) by mezcalero (subscriber, #45103) [Link]
No, my name is Poettering, not Pöttering. You can check my passport. There's no umlaut in my name.
Lennart
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 23:49 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
FWIW, Upstart is also used by the Kindle (not that it's open enough for you to tell without some serious cracking first, but of course this has been automated and is now relatively trivial on many Kindle OS releases).
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 2:24 UTC (Tue) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]
> The input event handling partly recreates the X semantics and is thus likely to expose similar problems to the ones we described in the introductory section.
It's totally wrong. And their other complaint about the shell interface is also based on a huge misunderstanding of how the protocol works. We could've told them that if they ever spoke to upstream at any stage, but I don't think it would have really made any difference - it's just back-justification for a decision made on wholly non-technical grounds. Which is fine, but unfortunately it's totally wrong, and I'm going to have to spend the next couple of years explaining to people that what they read about Wayland is totally incorrect. Shame.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 10:23 UTC (Tue) by ortalo (subscriber, #4654) [Link]
It seems they corrected their presentation now, no?
Anyway, it seems to me you should at least try to join forces on the topic of finally grabbing *complete* *non-NDAed* GPU hardware documentation from the GPU hardware manufacturers.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 17:22 UTC (Tue) by ewan (subscriber, #5533) [Link]
Correcting the erroneous statements isn't entirely the point though - the other part of this is that the entire foundation of the decision to start Mir seems to be based on having completely misunderstood things, and not having bothered to ask the questions that could have cleared up the misunderstandings.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 5, 2013 17:27 UTC (Tue) by daniels (subscriber, #16193) [Link]
Happily they have, as noted, corrected their page. I don't think the decision to create Mir was based on any technical grounds, to be honest.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 9:33 UTC (Wed) by ortalo (subscriber, #4654) [Link]
For the USSR space station at least, that's certain! ;-)
I suppose you would have appreciated to get Canonical support on Wayland. I would too.
However, I am still stubbornly concentrated on that GPU hardware documentation issue. It's been 40 years we have CPU architectural books with full instruction sets and 20 years without anything similar for GPU 3D instructions sets. That's ridiculous and I'd like the people in charge of this stupidity at NVidia/ATI to be fired real-soon-now(tm) because they are preventing decisive technical progress and are evidently unrecoverable.
Why not Wayland Posted Mar 6, 2013 23:53 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
I don't think this is actually true of ATI anymore. Some stuff isn't open, but enough is open (or has been implemented from closed specs by ATI/AMD people) that pretty good free software drivers now exist. (TBH, they've been more than good enough for desktop use for years: they're getting good enough for increasingly hefty games by this point.)
|
|||||||||||||