I can't find a "why" in the handful of PRs I opened.
>> I'm a aware that some people from Xorg development team think that @metux changes are not useful enough for various reasons
> Apologies for being blunt, but I'm afraid it's more like "everyone except you" by now. He's managed to fall out with pretty much every other active project member.
>> Xorg is dead anyway
> That's not a reason for me though. I actually feel bad for Xorg users, Enrico's churn is causing pain for them for no clear benefit.
There are evidently both technical and social issues at play.
Later in that thread, Encrico/metux offers a defence, an explanation with detail that this is part of a mission to “make X11 great again”. Don’t read too much into the comparison (please don’t!), but one similarity with the American politician who has been using a similar phrase for the last dedcade is that they don’t make an omelette without breaking eggs. In both cases, some think the broken eggs are acceptable collateral damage toward a worthy goal, and others don’t. In this case, other X11 maintainers aren’t interested in making X11 great again, but would prefer to let it rest obsolete and minimally maintained; and so, taking the best interpretations I can imagine, it’s necessary for this Enrico to fork the project and go it alone. But he’s going to be swimming upstream against a raging torrent. And he seems to be making various mistakes in some changes that weren’t supposed to change behaviour, due to inadequate testing (he offers explanations that at least some consider reasonable; so the errors may not indicate a broader pattern).
e.g.
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/merge_requests...
So now that we agree on this, what now? How exactly does
> does not give a warm fuzzy feeling about the author of the at-fault patch leading a fork.