Jonathan Billings wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 10:25:26AM -0500, Roger Heflin wrote: >> I think it is simple, in my experience your assertions are right on >> the money. They can't be bothered to learn it and/or they aren't good >> enough to learn it. If it is difficult for them to learn and/or they >> cannot learn it then they are doomed to failure on the re-write as >> they simply aren't good enough developers to redo it . Act like a >> developer: when your car runs badly, just melt it down and rebuild it >> from scratch, that must be easier than understanding how it is broken >> and fixing it. >> >> Not sure how one believes if they cannot debug the last script/program >> they wrote (or someone else did) that the new script/program will be >> any different. Developers seems to believe that all previous authors >> were incompetent and did things for no good reason and that they can >> do a significantly better job this time so want to start over. Too >> many people have told me that unlike the past team that failed using a >> given process,this time we are going to do it the exact same way but >> we are going to be perfect and not have the same issues and not fail. > > This is just FUD and ignorant of the Wayland project. Most of the > developers are current X.org developers or have worked on related code > used by X.org (input, drm, etc.). They're well aware of the current > X.org code and limitations in Wayland. Well and _painfully_ aware, I'm sure. :) I think the car analogy in Roger's post is reasonable and should be expanded a bit. In the case of "the car runs bad, melt it down," it's a bad idea if the person making the assessment is not a skilled mechanic. But, in the case of X, as Jonathan points out, the people making the assessment are the very mechanics who have been keeping the car on the road for a decade or more in many cases. When your mechanic says "I've given her all she's got, Captain" and tells you it's time for a new ride, that shouldn't be so easily ridiculed as laziness or incompetence. As a user, I will miss many of the features X provided. But when the folks who know a code base like Xorg's all-too-well have determined that its design isn't suitable for a secure, modern desktop and have been working to build a replacement, I have a hard time believing they're just being lazy. No truly lazy developer spends years working on a low-level windowing system like X or Wayland. Of course, if it is just laziness or incompetence, then it shouldn't be hard for folks who feel that way to step in and keep X going. That's the beauty of having the source. ;) -- Todd
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
