Someone explain why the push to wayland when there is no discernable performance increase [0] and lots of broken applications.
[0] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=GNOME-Xo...
[0] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=GNOME-Xo...
Development hasn't stalled because people think X is good. Development has stalled because the fundamental design is so misaligned from the modern graphics stack that improvements are not worth attempting.
X11 could be easily implemented on new driver framework supporting new graphic stack. Instead we got a piece of sh*t that is fitting for a custom embedded device or some closed environment, but not an X11 replacement.
I haven't seen many serious complaints that Wayland doesn't support the X11 protocol since people can run an X server directly using XWayland.
X11 could be updated a lot. But some of the "weird functionality" is stuff that is slowly becoming available for normal people that was thrown out with the bathwater by GTK3, like ability to use more than 8bit per colour channel.
Yeah, Wayland is a bad protocol. It isn't flexible enough to do what X11 does. But if it was a good protocol, and capable of implementing X11, then it would get X11 for free through XWayland.
They don't need to reimplement X11. They can use X.org or whatever for that.
In term of broken application, what do you mean?