[melissalobos]

I don't mean to diminish the post or the author, but I spent a decent amount of time reading through the pages and am about to try their code, but I get the feeling the author is a little either crazy or out of touch with how to communicate with people. It is clear they have made something interesting, but I can't help but feel there is something off in the communication of it.

[exikyut]

For what it's worth I happened to talk to the author a while back and we incidentally had a perfectly functional and pleasant conversation, he explained Arcan had been used in a variety of different contexts including machine-vision image recognition. I think this is more of a fundamental focal-point issue: this person can see something in what they're building that would only be appreciated by not just fellow engineers, but those specialized in the niche subfield of graphics that Arcan occupies. But that's the problem: I can't figure out what that niche is, and it would seem I'm not the only one. It feels extremely interesting, abstractly speaking, but that raw interestingness doesn't Do The Thing and resolve or "snap" to a relatable reference point. Which is really sad; without that extra "oh I get it!" this project is sadly going to have a hard time self-advertising and passively attracting interest. Even *cough* Mir (a Wayland alternative that's fallen into obscurity) has a tad more understandability going for it.

The upshot of this, though, is that if this ever gets to a point where it is relatable and can be appreciated at knee-jerk face value, it will be somewhere new and unfamiliar, and has the chance to have a noteworthy influence on how the Linux graphics status quo is reasoned about.

[KerrAvon]

I think they just have strong design ideas and are rapidly blasting them out in stream-of-consciousness form. It’s a lot of information without as much structure as would sometimes be helpful, but it doesn’t seem like a TempleOS-type situation where they’re actually detached from consensus reality.

[beepbeepcabbage]

They made cool stuff but with a complete disregard for a lot of what the rest of the industry has been up to and as a result have and are trying to reinvent wheels they are under-qualified to reinvent. The display server is dope but they don't need to be trying to design a new paradigm of distributed compute in their networking layer, they got beat to that faster and better by other products.

[linksnapzz]

The "rest of the industry"? The "Unix Desktop" industry? That one? The one that's still claiming that Wayland's deficiencies are due to it being a work in progress? The one that still can't synchronize on a single universally supported GUI library that's available by default on every system? He's not qualified to offer alternatives to _that_?

What sort of model glue should he begin sniffing in order to more effectively engage with this "industry"?