Home liberachat/#xmonad: Logs Calendar

Logs on 2023-10-23 (liberachat/#xmonad)

00:22:27 × catman quits (~catman@user/catman) (Quit: WeeChat 4.2.0-dev)
00:29:33 → catman joins (~catman@user/catman)
03:03:28 × td_ quits (~td@i5387090A.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
03:05:05 → td_ joins (~td@i53870920.versanet.de)
05:26:55 × catman quits (~catman@user/catman) (Quit: WeeChat 4.2.0-dev)
05:27:16 → catman joins (~catman@user/catman)
06:17:43 × ft quits (~ft@p4fc2a529.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Quit: leaving)
09:23:07 → derfflinger joins (~derffling@user/derfflinger)
10:21:38 × td_ quits (~td@i53870920.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
10:23:51 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> The Wayland protocol is pretty simple, what's hard is the stuff it needs to have done around it, such as display modesetting, input gathering and propagation, and the actual composition.
10:28:26 → td_ joins (~td@i5387090e.versanet.de)
10:31:31 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> This should be handeled by wlroots, no? I don't think trying to write our own implementation will end well; L-as's WayMonad implementation already modernised the bindings AFAIK
10:33:53 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> From what I saw of wlroots, I don't think it fits well with my way of doing things, as it seems to abstract a bit too much for my taste
10:35:01 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> I think then your tastes will have to change :P
10:35:34 <liskin> Well it's okay to have different tastes…
10:35:35 × derfflinger quits (~derffling@user/derfflinger) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
10:36:16 <liskin> But yeah we'd probably prefer a bit more pragmatic approach :-)
10:39:18 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> I believe that in the long run, not depending on wlroots is for the better, the abstraction is a bit too high level so it's likely to be limiting, and spending time on modifying that would add to more time than just having have written it more flexible in the first place
10:39:52 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> In the long run I would hope that wlroots becomes what is now essentially the X server
10:40:35 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> So sticking to it sounds more than advisable (and there have already been capable compositors written on top of it, making me doubt that it's "too limiting" in any real sense)
10:40:56 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> I don't think that seems to be the author's goal as it currently stands, from the way they approach things
10:42:10 <liskin> I'd expect the "xmonad on Wayland" efforts to start by creating a prototype, and I haven't seen a good argument why using wlroots in said prototype is a bad idea
10:42:51 <liskin> One might alternatively do the prototype by just taking an existing compositor and plugging xmonad logic in it, but that just means using Weston or mutter or kwin
10:43:07 <liskin> Still rather high-level stuff. There's no place for low-level in the first prototype
10:46:34 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> I too think a prototype is a good place to start, and I don't think abstraction has a place in a prototype unless the underlying low level stuff is that much more difficult.
10:49:33 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> Increasing the maintenance burden to exorbitant levels at the very start certainly does not sound like a good idea
10:49:49 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> Not to mention this would be *yet another* implementation that applications would have to support (if it ever came to that)
10:50:00 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> so… let's just use wlroots :)
10:50:41 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> Not sure I follow, not having a single main implementation is one of the design goals of wayland, that's why it's a protocol
10:51:41 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> and I think that sucks :)
10:51:47 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> but that's besides the point here
10:52:31 <liskin> Well applications shouldn't need to support it as long as we'd implement all the standard(-ish) protocols
10:52:44 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> Exactly
10:52:45 <liskin> The other arguments are enough on their own though
10:54:10 × td_ quits (~td@i5387090e.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
10:55:03 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> I do not think they are, I don't think it's possible to evaluate the maintenance burden without having even a line of code, and I am more comfortable with using the least amount of abstractions as possible, as it makes things easier to debug and understand.
10:55:56 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> I think the maintenance burden of having our own Wayland implementation vs.… not having that is fairly easy to evaluate
10:56:01 → td_ joins (~td@i53870909.versanet.de)
10:56:19 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> This is not really up for debate, tbh
10:57:02 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> How so?
11:04:12 × td_ quits (~td@i53870909.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
11:04:29 <haskellbridge> <S​olid> For all of the reasons alluded to above
11:05:24 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> Not sure I follow
11:06:18 → td_ joins (~td@i53870916.versanet.de)
11:07:44 → thyriaen joins (~thyriaen@2a01:aea0:dd4:7550:6245:cbff:fe9f:48b1)
11:19:02 → derfflinger joins (~derffling@user/derfflinger)
12:03:45 × lambdabot quits (~lambdabot@haskell/bot/lambdabot) (Remote host closed the connection)
12:05:03 → lambdabot joins (~lambdabot@haskell/bot/lambdabot)
12:07:30 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:50f8:a906:7e67:c666) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
12:16:14 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
12:18:56 × td_ quits (~td@i53870916.versanet.de) (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
12:20:38 → td_ joins (~td@i5387090D.versanet.de)
13:06:40 → scaniatrucker joins (~mindaugas@78-56-98-5.static.zebra.lt)
13:34:54 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
13:47:05 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
13:51:19 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
14:21:12 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
14:28:35 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
14:42:09 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
14:47:48 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
14:59:44 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
15:06:01 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
15:17:40 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
15:23:29 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
15:26:50 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
15:32:56 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
15:42:33 × derfflinger quits (~derffling@user/derfflinger) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
15:44:35 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
15:50:15 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
15:55:19 × thyriaen quits (~thyriaen@2a01:aea0:dd4:7550:6245:cbff:fe9f:48b1) (Remote host closed the connection)
16:02:04 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
16:08:02 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
16:18:11 → chomwitt joins (~chomwitt@2a02:587:7a1a:8700:1ac0:4dff:fedb:a3f1)
16:20:49 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
18:06:04 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
18:11:57 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
18:27:25 × defjam quits (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199) (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
18:30:22 → defjam joins (~defjam@2a02:c7e:2807:b900:d5a5:6ef4:28a8:2199)
18:31:48 × scaniatrucker quits (~mindaugas@78-56-98-5.static.zebra.lt) (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
21:17:51 → DangerBird joins (~DangerBir@dhcp-v060-240.mobile.uci.edu)
21:18:19 × DangerBird quits (~DangerBir@dhcp-v060-240.mobile.uci.edu) (Client Quit)
21:38:12 → ft joins (~ft@p4fc2a529.dip0.t-ipconnect.de)
23:07:23 × chomwitt quits (~chomwitt@2a02:587:7a1a:8700:1ac0:4dff:fedb:a3f1) (Quit: Leaving)
23:24:25 → chomwitt joins (~chomwitt@2a02:587:7a1a:8700:1ac0:4dff:fedb:a3f1)
23:29:00 × chomwitt quits (~chomwitt@2a02:587:7a1a:8700:1ac0:4dff:fedb:a3f1) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
23:38:30 ← catman parts (~catman@user/catman) (WeeChat 4.2.0-dev)

All times are in UTC on 2023-10-23.