Hi Jason,
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> Scott et. al,
> I'm not going to try and answer everything because a lot has happened
> on this topic and I think we're on the same page on most of the
> technical details.
>
>
>>> Here is how I think I would have such a protocol
Bill,
> The API must be designed so that no composite other than the initial and
> final is ever produced, even for a split second, for each of these
> transitions. By "other composite" I mean any different stacking order or any
> where the set of visibility of surfaces is different.
I think this
Scott et. al,
I'm not going to try and answer everything because a lot has happened
on this topic and I think we're on the same page on most of the
technical details.
>> Here is how I think I would have such a protocol work. (Perhaps this
>> is what you intend, but, like I said, it's kind of hard
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:25 PM, John Kåre Alsaker
wrote:
> The extension should be added to weston-egl-ext.h instead.
Yup, that should do it.
Kristian
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Rob Bradford
> wrote:
>> From: Rob Bradford
>>
>> In 1c169ff support is added for using the EGL_BUFFER_AG
The extension should be added to weston-egl-ext.h instead.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Rob Bradford wrote:
> From: Rob Bradford
>
> In 1c169ff support is added for using the EGL_BUFFER_AGE_EXT extension
> including runtime detection of whether the extension is available. This change
> exten
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:32 AM, RenoX wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Jason Ekstrand
> wrote:
>> I'm not sure exactly what I think of all this surface transform
>> passing. I'll get back to that once I get a chance to think about it.
>> Part of the problem is that you don't want
From: Rob Bradford
In 1c169ff support is added for using the EGL_BUFFER_AGE_EXT extension
including runtime detection of whether the extension is available. This change
extends that to also check that the extension is known about at compile time.
This allows weston to continue to compile against
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Jason Ekstrand
wrote:
> I'm not sure exactly what I think of all this surface transform
> passing. I'll get back to that once I get a chance to think about it.
> Part of the problem is that you don't want to try and make your
> animations subpixel-perfect becaus
