Martin Peres, a graphics and open source developer, writes on Wayland, GPU driver CI systems, FPGAs, and live-streaming setups.
HN links it for the Wayland privileged-clients post, which commenters point to on Wayland security, and for his multi-part series on setting up a CI system.
In the near future, probably nothing. Wayland is (probably) still years from getting adopted even by "bleeding-edge" distributions like Arch.
Your everyday experience shouldn't get affected, hopefully. Wayland removes a lot of legacy from X, but their end result is pretty much the same, "display some stuff on my screen". And XWayland should assure this, since you'll be able to run applications that don't support X on Wayland in a seamless way. Most applications use some toolkit anyway (gtk, qt) that are getting ported to Wayland, so the author of that applications shouldn't do any changes to make it work on Wayland (beside recompiling it).
At best, Wayland should be lighter than X, and it should fix tearing if you have some now (but this is already fixed by modern wm, at least on my computer).
One of the biggest change that you shouldn't notice is security, X has tons of holes (every application can read/write into another application), which wayland fix (see here for more: http://mupuf.org/blog/2014/02/19/wayland-compositors-why-and-how-to-handle/).
Same for Mir (but I dunno about the security issues that Wayland fixes), but upstream doesn't seems willing to accept Mir-specific patches, so Canonical might end with having to patch applications/toolkit/drivers downstream (but the user shouldn't notice any difference anyway).
An interactive introduction (now unmaintained as author wrote to an HN submission) to X windowing system:
https://magcius.github.io/xplain/article/index.html
That covers the graphics part which is the same for the two windowing systems.
See Wayland's FAQ[1] and architecture[2] page for why it was made and how they differ.
https://wayland.freedesktop.org/faq.html
https://wayland.freedesktop.org/architecture.html
Though not primary goal according to their FAQ, Wayland also improves security.
For this see:
https://lwn.net/Articles/517375/
http://mupuf.org/blog/2014/02/19/wayland-compositors-why-and-how-to-handle/
That proof-of-concept relied on a custom protocol extension which, as the author pointed out, was not meant to be merged in Wayland/Weston. In any case the extension required application to ask the compositor to be notified of the pointer position even when not "owning" it and the compositor can flatly refuse it to non-privileged clients according to any policy it wants, which is quite different from the current X11 situation.
This article has some useful information on how Wayland addresses the security concerns expressed in this thread:
http://mupuf.org/blog/2014/02/19/wayland-compositors-why-and-how-to-handle/
Yes, it is.
For more details about the issues and possible solutions read:
http://mupuf.org/blog/2014/02/19/wayland-compositors-why-and-how-to-handle/
Here's a summary of security in Wayland:
http://mupuf.org/blog/2014/02/19/wayland-compositors-why-and-how-to-handle/
https://lwn.net/Articles/589147/
Thanks, it’s a bit more interesting:
http://mupuf.org/blog/2021/02/10/setting-up-a-ci-system-part-2-generating-and-deploying-your-test-environment/