They've been working on Wayland support for awhile now.

https://wiki.xfce.org/releng/wayland_roadmap

I think it was the "security" argument. Some magic words like "security" and "protect the children" make most people go insane, abandon all reason.

Wayland is not a "display server", it's a display protocol.

A lot of the "existing functionality" that it broke has nothing to do with displays, it's stuff that got crammed into Xorg at some point whether it made sense or not.

I find it quite funny that many of the same people that rag on systemd and say it does too many things, are big fans of Xorg doing a bunch of things that "display server" probably should not be handling.

Even if Wayland was a "display server", it would still "remove existing functionality" if it meant that in any principled sense, because "display server" is only half of what Xorg does.

But sure, the transition was difficult and took a long time.

> For the life of me, I'll never understand how wayland got traction with the community.

Corporate drive. Originally sponsored by Intel followed by IBM (RedHat) and the rest followed suit.

> I'll never understand how wayland got traction with the community

There were only a few people willing to work on an alternative, and they didn't have to take a vote, so they just did what they wanted. Corporations and projects adopted it because they wanted something different, and it was the only other option.

Now that we have AI, it will be much easier for genuine community alternatives to emerge, even if we have to battle over the legal ramifications. I for one am willing to go without "official support" to have software that doesn't suck.

[dead]