> So here's the thing: X works extremely well for what it is, but what it is is deeply flawed. There's no shame in that, it's 33 years old and still relevant, I wish more software worked so well on that kind of timeframe. But using it to drive your display hardware and multiplex your input devices is choosing to make your life worse.
> ...
> So, is Xorg abandoned? To the extent that that means using it to actually control the display, and not just keep X apps running, I'd say yes. But xserver is more than xfree86. Xwayland, Xwin, Xephyr, Xvnc, Xvfb: these are projects with real value that we should not give up. A better way to say it is that we can finally abandon xfree86.
---
I think that to the extent there's confusion, it's because a lot of people (myself included) don't understand the project structure of Xorg. I honestly still don't know what the distinction is between these projects, I just know that around this time people started saying that it was time to switch to Wayland.
> So, is Xorg abandoned? To the extent that that means using it to actually control the display, and not just keep X apps running, I'd say yes
This seems a bit like developer hubris to me, a bit like when commercial developers are overconfident in deprecating things without understanding usage in the field. It's somewhat blind to actual usage. It isn't dead in that sense.
Now, the maintainer might not want to do it, and that's within their rights. But it's possible that somebody will step up to do any maintenance work. Which would probably be minimal but not zero.
