Autsch! I would never do that... X11 is such a broken mess, but then my window management needs seem to be very different from yours.
Applications do have a say in how big they get rendered (typically by giving a min/max/preferred size), which window managers may or may not resepct/adjust for after the window comes up. Maybe it is just that.
Maybe you are running Wayland and not X11?
Where are those alternatives? I have not seen anything that is Baustoff convincing yet...
It is not a project owned by redhat... the lead guy not even works there anymore. So the more interesting question is: What happens if Microsoft closes down the project? The answer: It will be forked.
Not at all: I listed the arguments you will get for that question of yours. They all are bogus, as I tried to explain between the parens.
How is that different to when every distribution shoved their implementation of sysv-init into your face? You were never free to choose your init, it always came from the distribution. You could (and still can) replace the init system, if you are willing to do the work involved.
That's the whole point: Nobody is willing to do the work for one distribution, if they can just improve systemd and fix a whole bunch of distributions at once. That's why developers flock to the systemd umbrella project to implement their ideas there, which is why systemd keeps getting cool be features for the plumbing layer of Linux -- which is far more than just the init system.
No need to drag that BS from the archives. It was never correct nor convincing.
Same reason as for all those years these old people are holding a grudge for...
It is not Unix philosophy (nothing is these days), it does not solve any problem they ever had (it does), it is no improvement over what we had before (it is) and even makes some broken and moronic things harder (it does), it is insecure (it improves overall system security), and it is one monolithic blob (it is not). Before systemd nothing depended on the init system (true, but then it did nothing useful that made having such a dependency worthwhile), and before systemd we were all free to use other init systems and distributions did not pick one for their users (they always did, offering additional inits only as unsupported iption just likenthey do now).
That's the typical list you get.
Oh, and it was shoved down all our throats by the mighty Lennart himself, backed by several multi billion dollar companies that brided thousands of distribution developers to destroy Linux (it was not).
Funnily enough it is pretty much the same BS we had when that monster of complexity called sysv init was introduced into distributions, replacing a simple script with a forest of symlinks. Of course the community was much smaller then and so we had a loser number of idiots to shout at everybody else.
We can always use a UX person over at https://github.com/slint-ui/slint :-) Slint is a UI toolkit written in rust, but the UI is defined in a simple custom language that is really easy to pick up.
You could polish up existing demos, to create new ones and could even come up with new widgets.
We try to be a nice community, feel free to drop by and chat if you have questions in our mattermost instance hosted at https://chat.slint.dev/
Most devs have never seen a braille display or used a screen reader. Thos that did probably could not read of the braille display and were happy for the screen reader to read or random words with no idea how to use a computer with just the information read out.
It is hard for a seeing dev to get a feel for how information needs to be presented using assistive technologies (which are usually not even available to the developer).
What is actually meassured there? "Line goes down" is not necessary a bad thing:-)
Last I checked: I am not a supplier. So I will not invest effort to secure some supply chain for people that I do not have any obligations to: The license clearly states "no warranty" for a reason. I do those projects for fun, not to bother me with security stuff, notifications about security problems some automatic thing "found" that do not really effect my code and bogus merge requests to upgrade dependencies for no reason... this are all cool things if you are a supplier, do not get me wrong, but I am not. No, I will not invest hours of my free time to sign binaries nobody uses either or to fill out security surveys for badges I can display on github.
If you want me to act like a supplier: Pay me like all the other suppliers you have. I doubt there is any interest to do so for the projects I have on my private github :-)
That also has associated costs: Your project gets instantly much less visible, so you need to keep a mirror on github for visibility. Unfortunately that also means that you will also get interactions on github, so you will need to log in occasionally to not make people think the project is dead.