On 11/06/2010 04:16 PM, Mark Bidewell wrote: >>>> Out of interest, do you use individual shells/terms or something that >>>> provides a more remote desktop like experience? >>> >>> I use ssh -Y. Anything that sits in a huge window showing an entire >>> desktop-in-a-desktop is so obviously the wrong way to do it, from both >>> a usability and efficiency perspective, that I'm just astonished that >>> people suggest I use something like VNC. >> >> We use both approaches, I suppose both have their merits, and we >> shouldn't rule out either method of working. >> >> -Cam >> -- >> devel mailing list >> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >> > One of the many concerns I have with Wayland involves VNC. Right now > VNC on X uses some of the multiuser functions to enable multiple VNC > consoles. Will Wayland still allow for this or will we be back to > Windows with only one VNC session per computer. Linux/Unix is > designed around multiuser/multisession, I believe we would be amiss to > remove those capabilities from the OS. > First I think you should probably head over to the Wayland mailing list and get involved there. That's something I also recommend to Richard because if you want certain features to be present now is a good time to make your voices heard over there. That's the reason I brought the topic up in here so people can have a discussion over what the requirements are to make this work well with Fedora as a project and then push for inclusions of these requirements in Wayland. Second I am a bit surprised by the "unless feature X is implemented 1:1 we shouldn't allow progess" sort of argument that is going on here. The main reason I'm excited about Wayland is the fact that it creates competition. I agree with Camilo that X doesn't seem to cope with the requirements of modern desktops well and I believe the reason for that is the fact that in the absence of a competitor it's very easy to settle for "good enough". Yes X is good enough for basic desktop especially after the great improvements that happened after the Xorg split but being good enough doesn't really jive well with Fedoras claim of being a showcase for technical innovation. I've lurked on the Xorg mailing list long enough to see the various attempts of improving X being stomped by the fact that compatibility with decade old protocols that no one really cares about on a modern desktop must be maintained. The fact that X can be run as a client on Wayland makes for a pretty perfect situation in my eyes. Wayland can make design decision unhampered by the past while people who rely on specific X features can keep using these applications without change. If the advantages of Wayland weigh so heavily then X will at some point be obsoleted. I these advantages don't materialize then Wayland will disappear and we will return to X. But a third possible outcome - and one that in my opinion is pretty likely to occur - could be that a lot of the features of X (like remote applications) will actually be implemented in Wayland precisely because they have enough merit to survive and that looks like a great future to me: a modern implementation of all the features we love and care about. As for the "if all apps are ported to Wayland I will not be able to use them remotely anymore" I think this is bogus. Nowadays virtually all application aren't X application but gtk/qt applications and the toolkits tend to support different backends. So you will be able to use your apps as long as the toolkits support X and I think that's going to be a long time unless Wayland is dramatically successfull. Regards, Dennis -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
