115
Does Wayland really break everything? (Nate Graham's OG post ref'd in the Phoronix article)
(pointieststick.com)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
I think these are the two key takeaways – Wayland is still in development and the bandwagoning are the early adopters – most of us will switch when our distros switch (and will probably be none the wiser)
the problems (and the reason we’re suffering through sensationalist stuff like “Wayland breaks everything!”) is the fanboy push to switch before it’s ready – not everybody lives on the bleeding edge (just like not everyone runs Arch) and the “switch now or be left behind” attitude does more harm than good (far more likely to alienate than convert) …
The things you think aren't finished because it's still in development are actually not finished because they're just the way the developers want.
Many of those things you're thinking of were declared Somebody Else's Problem by said developers. That's fine, but Wayland was not ready for use by normal end users until somebody else did finish them.
From what I hear most of them actually are finished by now, but they weren't as of a couple years ago when it started becoming commonplace to see declarations that the time to switch to Wayland was Right Now. I tried it out then, and am as a result much less enthusiastic about doing it again now even though it'd be much more likely to go well.