[radonek]

Just look at the project site (which at this point is a README on github). I see a few lines about upgrade issues, absolutely nothing about project itself. What improvements or changes over Xorg are implemented? Roadmap of future changes? Why should I pick this over Xorg?

Instead, we get pageful of whining about how bad bad big tech pissed on authors cornflakes. Hate? I don't see any reason to hate the guy. But I also don't see a single bit of reason to take him seriously.

[mikece]

Why he forked Xorg: as I understand it there were THOUSANDS of merge requests to address issues in Xorg that were being ignored (possibly because the Red Hat employees who managed Xorg MRs were ignoring them on purpose because they were more interested in Wayland -- but that's speculation at this point). He felt strongly enough about this to fork the projects... at which point, apparently, all of those MRs were closed (and deleted?) making it difficult or impossible for XLibre to pick up those MRs and apply to them to the fork.

(My source on what I wrote are a couple videos by Lunduke.)

[imiric]

That is beside the point. Whether the forked project has any merits for existing doesn't explain the hostility towards its developer. All we know is that the developer was banned from freedesktop.org[1], but no reason was given.

We can argue whether their contributions were a net positive to the upstream project, and I'm aware that they were criticized for breaking the build on `master` more than once, but this doesn't explain the ban. Under these circumstances, forking is a sane choice if the developer plans to continue working on it.

With the recent news that GNOME and Ubuntu will be dropping support for Xorg in upcoming releases, I think it's great that someone is at least motivated to continue improving Xorg. All Linux users shouldn't be forced to use Wayland. This is similar to the forced systemd adoption we went through a few years ago.

[1]: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/work_items/182...