It is just my personal opinion, but I really like how you can control whether or not you have a xorg-server running or not.

From what I see in the commit, you already have a setting that control the desired behavior 👍

Yes, you can disable it with xwayland-satellite { off; }

Will there be support for set additional parameters for xwayland-satellite? (e.g. -rootless), or is this left to xwayland-satellite { off; }?

There are no additional parameters. xwayland-satellite does not support any arguments.

There are no additional parameters. xwayland-satellite does not support any arguments.

Aha, now that you mention it, I went back to look.

I had only been passing one parameter all along, whereas this position in the code should have been reserved for display.

I accidentally used it for parameter passing, relying on a "bug" to run.......

https://github.com/Supreeeme/xwayland-satellite/blob/da2ecb5be816de35e2efe23a408a1c49fe8b11ba/src/main.rs#L62

https://github.com/Supreeeme/xwayland-satellite/blob/da2ecb5be816de35e2efe23a408a1c49fe8b11ba/src/lib.rs#L71-L73

Pretty sure that shouldn't let you pass any extra parameters.

Either way, you're not supposed to pass any custom parameters to Xwayland on any WM that integrates with it. xwl-s already passes -rootless on its own

Extremely odd decision to include xwayland in the best wayland composer. People won't start using wayland 100% unless you force them to use wayland. They will continue to use xorg software if they don't stop boycotting xorg. I would like to make it so that niri can be built without mentioning xorg.

Well I don't see Steam finally switching to Wayland because some obscure WM doesn't run Xwayland out of the box. So no, the only outcome of niri not integrating some Xwayland out of the box is that it's harder and more annoying for new users, and detracts people from trying niri.

If you don't like it you can turn it off in the config, then it will do nothing (exactly the same as before this PR). Or just not install xwayland-satellite. If you really don't like it, it's easy enough to patch out.

No complaints then, if you can cut out xwayland. I fear for niri, as it is the only good product a product one uses and is happy with. No problems have been observed.

Note also that there's no trace of Xwayland in niri itself. All this code is doing is creating X11 sockets and spawning xwayland-satellite

Extremely odd decision to include xwayland in the best wayland composer. People won't start using wayland 100% unless you force them to use wayland. They will continue to use xorg software if they don't stop boycotting xorg. I would like to make it so that niri can be built without mentioning xorg.

Could not disagree more. In the current state of affairs it is impossible to live without x11 applications in a normal production environment. For many people (me included), niri without the xwayland-sattellite support would be impracticable.