Well, Plasma 6 made it the default. Some things are better with Wayland (e.g., performance), but others are worse (e.g., no session restore so far...).
What bothers me is that I have the impression that when I switched from X11 to Wayland a few months ago, Wayland was a bit more stable when it came to suspending and restoring the pc. But after a few months, I had the same problems (crashes) as with X11. It feels like someone fixed something in the wrong direction.
> How is Wayland support these days? I love i3 but I know Sway promises to be close enough.
I think it depends on what you mean by “Wayland”, but I’m an Arch/Sway user with AMD hardware on my desktop and Apple silicon on my laptop, and Sway performance/stability is great on both, with the caveat that my laptop is now running the Asahi Fedora remix instead of Arch, since the Asahi team killed the Arch port off a while back.
Depends on your tolerance level. I get random crashes under heavy load at least once a month or so under CPU-bound tasks. As I said, GPU/Sway stability is perfect - I've had no issues there, but large rust builds seem to tip the system over occasionally.
> How is Wayland support these days? I love i3 but I know Sway promises to be close enough.
Pretty darn good. So good in fact that my personal computers have run with xwayland disabled for years (YMMV, there is certainly some Linux software that still requires X).
What bootloader is this using? Or is it just straight EFI booting?
I helped write a guide a few years back that still is what I do using systemd-boot. https://github.com/lunasec-io/lunasec/blob/master/docs/blog/...
How is Wayland support these days? I love i3 but I know Sway promises to be close enough.