One of the big issues with Wayland is the (intentional) fragmentation. Each "Wayland compositor" is really its own window system, with its own peculiarities. This forces applications that would have been trivial to implement on X to either limit support to only a single "compositor", or suffer explosion of compositor-interfacing code.

IMO this, on its own, means that pushing Wayland is intentional sabotage of "desktop Linux", because the fragmentation could be deadly for the ecosystem. It's fine, if perhaps short-sighted, for the big corps and desktops that do the pushing, of course, because they're fine with supporting just a single "compositor".