It looks like it's shaping up very nicely to solve the problems it was designed to solve--namely, making every frame of image on the screen pixel-perfect. However, I don't know if it's going to solve other outstanding problems (or regress on some fronts).
Despite the pains, X allows window managers to arbitrate over window management policy relatively effectively. From what I see so far, it seems that this will be a less clear-cut scheme in Wayland, given its clientside window management and decoration setup. Individual applications will have more freedom to misbehave in terms of custom titlebars etc. and refusing to cooperate with management actions. In an environment where GTK, Qt, wrapped X programs, and other toolkits will be coexisting, there's a lot of room for implementations to behave differently in ways that will confuse and upset users. Whether this will actually be the case is yet to be seen, but I've never seen three different software projects implement a feature in exactly the same way without sharing code.
Despite the pains, X allows window managers to arbitrate over window management policy relatively effectively. From what I see so far, it seems that this will be a less clear-cut scheme in Wayland, given its clientside window management and decoration setup. Individual applications will have more freedom to misbehave in terms of custom titlebars etc. and refusing to cooperate with management actions. In an environment where GTK, Qt, wrapped X programs, and other toolkits will be coexisting, there's a lot of room for implementations to behave differently in ways that will confuse and upset users. Whether this will actually be the case is yet to be seen, but I've never seen three different software projects implement a feature in exactly the same way without sharing code.
As the saying goes, we live in exciting times.