On 16 May 2011 23:13, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> Michal Suchanek wrote:
>
>> The thing is that in Wayland the server is not aware of any remote vs
>> local windows. Remote applications are in no way part of the protocol
>> and will supposedly sneak in later by means of some remoting proxy.
>
> My under
Michal Suchanek wrote:
The thing is that in Wayland the server is not aware of any remote vs
local windows. Remote applications are in no way part of the protocol
and will supposedly sneak in later by means of some remoting proxy.
My understanding is the exact opposite: the compositor is *VERY
William Swanson wrote:
Expanding the window leaves unpainted
background clearly visible for about 3/4 second during updates.
Windows unfortunatly draws into a single buffer that the compositor is
using, so you still see partial updates like this. They may be unable to
avoid this as the api
On 16 May 2011 16:17, Solerman Kaplon wrote:
> Em 13-05-2011 15:38, Michal Suchanek escreveu:
>>
>> If the client takes, say, half a second to update which is completely
>> reasonable for a full re-layout and repaint of a window that normally
>> gets only partial updates then the resize will be *v
Em 13-05-2011 15:38, Michal Suchanek escreveu:
If the client takes, say, half a second to update which is completely
reasonable for a full re-layout and repaint of a window that normally
gets only partial updates then the resize will be *very* jerky, and if
the client is uploading a bitmap over n
