Update XLibre post wording and About page

Clarify Xorg revert sentence to reflect contribution practices. Add disclaimer note explaining the correction with dyslexia context. Add Wayland disclaimer. Mention dyslexia in the About page intro.

English is not my first language, and mistakes are bound to happen adding my dyslexia on top.

Author: ericbsd

content/2026-02-15-addressing-xlibre-change-and-ghostbsd-future.md

@@ -14,12 +14,16 @@ There was hope at one point that Xorg would get improvements, but that hope was
 
 When XLibre started, it first looked controversial. Before making a decision to try it, I wanted to see what would happen with it. When it started to look promising, I began to evaluate it more seriously. When the porting to FreeBSD started, we got it ported to GhostBSD by b-aaz to our ports tree. It got into GhostBSD's ports tree before FreeBSD. We tested it and made builds available, but we weren't planning to release it for 26.01.
 
-Following the announcement that Xorg would revert changes, I wasn't sure what to do. On one hand, if I release with Xorg, we might end up with weird side effects when CVEs come our way. People who don't know me well, do not know that I dislike changes that don't seem rational to me. There's a reason why GhostBSD never moved to Gnome 3. The UI of Gnome 2 was extremely good. In my opinion, they should have continued with the same UI but improved it. MacOS has been on the same UI for a long time, and that's why their users feel at home on each release. Yes, it has improved over time, but it never drastically changed. When Gnome 3 was released, GhostBSD was in an identity crisis. We started to have multiple versions of GhostBSD. To this day, we only have XFCE left. When I discovered MATE, I switched my efforts to it. I digress, but this is to say that I always look at changes in a project carefully. Xorg reverting code just because of a dislike for someone, without considering the community using it, is a big red flag to me.
+Following the announcement that Xorg would revert changes, I wasn't sure what to do. On one hand, if I release with Xorg, we might end up with weird side effects when CVEs come our way. People who don't know me well, do not know that I dislike changes that don't seem rational to me. There's a reason why GhostBSD never moved to Gnome 3. The UI of Gnome 2 was extremely good. In my opinion, they should have continued with the same UI but improved it. MacOS has been on the same UI for a long time, and that's why their users feel at home on each release. Yes, it has improved over time, but it never drastically changed. When Gnome 3 was released, GhostBSD was in an identity crisis. We started to have multiple versions of GhostBSD. To this day, we only have XFCE left. When I discovered MATE, I switched my efforts to it. I digress, but this is to say that I always look at changes in a project carefully. Xorg reverting code just because of a dislike of someone's contribution practices, without considering the community using it is a big red flag to me.
 
-I looked at XLibre's improvements and was impressed. I started to think: if I release 26.01 with XLibre, I'll have to push the release for a month or two, but at least we should be in good shape. The change to XLibre is because GhostBSD is not ready for Wayland, and Wayland is not ready for GhostBSD. Some could say that Wayland works. Yes, it does. I've used it on Linux and it works. But GhostBSD is not Linux, and MATE is not ready for it yet. XFCE is not ready for it, and Gershwin isn't either. From what I know, GNUstep is not ready for Wayland.
+> Disclaimer: I made a correction above because the original thought was incomplete and open to interpretation. I have dyslexia, and even though I use Claude Code for syntax corrections, AI cannot know what I have in mind. At least not yet.
+
+I looked at XLibre's improvements and was impressed. I started to think: if I release 26.01 with XLibre, I'll have to push the release for a month or two, but at least we should be in good shape. The change to XLibre is because GhostBSD is not ready for Wayland yet. Some would say that Wayland works. Yes, it does. I've used it on Linux and it works. But GhostBSD is not Linux, and MATE is not ready for it yet. XFCE is not ready for it, and Gershwin isn't either. From what I know, GNUstep is not ready for Wayland.
 
 In short, it's a technical decision: MATE is not ready for Wayland, and Xorg is going backward.
 
+> Disclaimer: This does not mean GhostBSD will never move to Wayland.
+
 ## The Uncertain Future of GhostBSD
 
 Right now, the state of MATE is uncertain. We don't hear much from the devs, so I'm unsure what the future of MATE looks like, other than knowing that Wayland support has started. Also, MATE hasn't improved much in the last few years. One thing is for sure: I do like GTK 3, but I don't know how long it will be maintained. GTK 4 is fine, but GTK 5 will not support X11. That's where I see the crossroads. GTK could be forked, but I'm only one man doing most of the work on GhostBSD. I'm not alone, but I think in the vision of GhostBSD's future, I've always been alone.