[mspnp]

This "let's make things slower, heavier, and more brittle in exchange of this small improvement" mantra is the scourge of software today.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

I personally don't consider it just a small improvement. Tearing drives me crazy and I'm comfortable sacrificing a frame to make sure it never happens.

However, I will admit that Crinus makes some compelling points.

[Crinus]

I should note (i already mention it in my other post but it is in a little bit in a sea of words) that disliking tearing and wanting to run a desktop environment free of it is perfectly fine and X11 does allow for that - there is nothing in it (considering extensions too) that prevents such use and if there are bugs then these are bugs that can be fixed.

My issue with Wayland when it comes to composition is that it forces it whereas in contrast X11 just enables it - but doesn't force it.

It is the good old "having options" argument which, for some reason, always comes up when GNOME and Red Hat projects are involved.

(just as a note, composition isn't my only issue with Wayland, i have other issues with it being short-sighted and needlessly limited, but these are outside the current discussion)

[CmdrKrool]

The wording of the parent comment - specifically "Wayland is a protocol fully designed around composition [...] There is no way to draw directly to the screen" - made me think that this is a case originally of idealism, that when seen to be naive, presses on into diseased dogmatism. Some people decide that for example 'composition' is the be all and end all, and all other aspects are secondary to it, or less. Therefore if useful functionality is dropped, so be it.

[throwaway2048]

"if useful functionality is dropped, so be it." Seems to be the mantra of wayland.