Jasper,
I looked through your xdg-shell-rewrite branch and, other than some things
that need better docs/rewording, I think it looks OK. In particular, I
think we're probably OK removing set_unstable_version in 1.6.
Things that need attention (some of this may be a repeat of what Pekka
said):
-
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:37:13 -0700
Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Giulio Camuffo
> wrote:
>
> > 2014-08-27 11:38 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:03:04 +0300
> > > Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> > >
> > >> 2014-08-27 10:32 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
>
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Giulio Camuffo
wrote:
> 2014-08-27 11:38 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> > On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:03:04 +0300
> > Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> >
> >> 2014-08-27 10:32 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> >> > On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:50:47 +0300
> >> > Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> >>
2014-08-27 11:38 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:03:04 +0300
> Giulio Camuffo wrote:
>
>> 2014-08-27 10:32 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
>> > On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:50:47 +0300
>> > Giulio Camuffo wrote:
>> >
>> >> 2014-08-26 17:39 GMT+03:00 Jason Ekstrand :
>> >> >
>> >> > On Au
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:03:04 +0300
Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> 2014-08-27 10:32 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> > On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:50:47 +0300
> > Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> >
> >> 2014-08-26 17:39 GMT+03:00 Jason Ekstrand :
> >> >
> >> > On Aug 26, 2014 1:01 AM, "Giulio Camuffo"
> >> > wrote:
> >
2014-08-27 10:32 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:50:47 +0300
> Giulio Camuffo wrote:
>
>> 2014-08-26 17:39 GMT+03:00 Jason Ekstrand :
>> >
>> > On Aug 26, 2014 1:01 AM, "Giulio Camuffo" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 2014-08-26 10:24 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
>> >> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 17:50:47 +0300
Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> 2014-08-26 17:39 GMT+03:00 Jason Ekstrand :
> >
> > On Aug 26, 2014 1:01 AM, "Giulio Camuffo" wrote:
> >>
> >> 2014-08-26 10:24 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> >> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 21:51:57 -0700
> >> > Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> >> >
>
You are right, "as fast as possible" is a poor name.
What I think the options are is:
1. Use a scale so the surface exactly fills the screen
2. Use the largest integer that fits on the screen. This will produce a
sharper image.
I'm unsure if there is any hardware where integer scaling is ava
For "as fast as possible", can I show randomly generated pixels instead?
For a HiDPI display, it's as useful as running 1:1, centered, and it
certainly is a hell of a lot faster.
I don't care about "fast" if it can't make any guarantees about what the
user gets in the end. Games might try and set
On 08/26/2014 07:39 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
- Preferred fullscreen scaling: "I would like to be as large as
possible", "I would like to be pixel-perfect, even if that means smaller
and surrounded in black", etc. TBH, I don't know how many clients would
actually like the later one. Maybe if
On 08/25/2014 11:25 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
No, please make it impossible for a client to rely on events being
echoed in response to requests. Otherwise toolkits will rely on this and
Wayland will become a synchronous protocol.
Did you understand that this is not an additional round-trip, bu
On Aug 26, 2014 1:01 AM, "Giulio Camuffo" wrote:
>
> 2014-08-26 10:24 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 21:51:57 -0700
> > Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> >
> >> Just a couple quick comments below.
> >>
> >> I can't fin where this goes, so I'm putting it here: Why are we having
> >> com
2014-08-26 17:39 GMT+03:00 Jason Ekstrand :
>
> On Aug 26, 2014 1:01 AM, "Giulio Camuffo" wrote:
>>
>> 2014-08-26 10:24 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
>> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 21:51:57 -0700
>> > Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>> >
>> >> Just a couple quick comments below.
>> >>
>> >> I can't fin where this g
2014-08-26 10:24 GMT+03:00 Pekka Paalanen :
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 21:51:57 -0700
> Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
>> Just a couple quick comments below.
>>
>> I can't fin where this goes, so I'm putting it here: Why are we having
>> compositors send an initial configure event again? Given that we have
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 21:51:57 -0700
Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> Just a couple quick comments below.
>
> I can't fin where this goes, so I'm putting it here: Why are we having
> compositors send an initial configure event again? Given that we have a
> serial, tiling compositors can just send a confi
On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:21:33 -0700
Bill Spitzak wrote:
> On 08/25/2014 04:11 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>
> > Let's also think about the size hints, how do they interact here, even
> > if we are not adding them yet.
> >
> > The client creates a wl_surface, gives it content, and turns it into
> >
Just a couple quick comments below.
I can't fin where this goes, so I'm putting it here: Why are we having
compositors send an initial configure event again? Given that we have a
serial, tiling compositors can just send a configure and wait until the
client responds to the event. Non-tiling com
On 08/25/2014 04:11 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
Let's also think about the size hints, how do they interact here, even
if we are not adding them yet.
The client creates a wl_surface, gives it content, and turns it into
xdg_surface, and sends size hints.
The compositor as a response to get_xdg_su
On Fri, 22 Aug 2014 16:48:13 -0400
"Jasper St. Pierre" wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 17:57:45 -0400
> > "Jasper St. Pierre" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jasper,
> >
> > I am not reviewing this patch now. Instead, I took xdg-shell.xml from
> > Wes
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 17:57:45 -0400
> "Jasper St. Pierre" wrote:
>
> Hi Jasper,
>
> I am not reviewing this patch now. Instead, I took xdg-shell.xml from
> Weston master as today, and I'm giving comments on it, as you have
> declared it prac
On Thu, 17 Jul 2014 17:57:45 -0400
"Jasper St. Pierre" wrote:
> We've gone through enough churn of xdg-shell that we're now feeling
> confident enough to commit to this much. Let's do it.
>
> The major version number is bumped to 2 because unfortunately we need to
> remove the use_unstable_versi
On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Manuel Bachmann <
manuel.bachm...@open.eurogiciel.org> wrote:
> Hi Jasper, Jaspon, thanks for taking good arguments to the table,
>
> "Destroying and creating an xdg_surface will, certainly."
>
> Yes, that's what we have been doing for some time, but it has the se
Hey Jasper,
On Thu, 2014-07-17 at 17:57 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> We've gone through enough churn of xdg-shell that we're now feeling
> confident enough to commit to this much. Let's do it.
It would make me much more confident if the somewhat odd life-time rules
of xdg-shell were addresse
Hi Jasper, Jaspon, thanks for taking good arguments to the table,
"Destroying and creating an xdg_surface will, certainly."
Yes, that's what we have been doing for some time, but it has the serious
drawback that the new surface will not be positioned the same.
"xdg_surface_present_window()"
"wi
On 07/18/2014 11:41 AM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Bill Spitzak
I see no reason this can't be called "show" or "raise".
The *creation* of a surface does not mean that the compositor must
show it. It could add a blinking "attention needed" task bar
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Bill Spitzak wrote:
> On 07/18/2014 09:55 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
> I really like Jasper's "present" request solution to this problem. (It
>> could probably also be called "attention"). If kwin wants to implement
>> that as "move to the appropriate workspace
On 07/18/2014 09:55 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
I really like Jasper's "present" request solution to this problem. (It
could probably also be called "attention"). If kwin wants to implement
that as "move to the appropriate workspace and unminimize, then it can
do that. Otherwise, it could start
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:31 AM, nerdopolis
wrote:
> On Friday, July 18, 2014 08:25:33 AM Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> > The lack of an unset_minimized feature is very intentional. The *goal*,
> it
> > sounds like, is to present the window immediately again, but an
> > unset_minimized won't do that
On Friday, July 18, 2014 08:25:33 AM Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> The lack of an unset_minimized feature is very intentional. The *goal*, it
> sounds like, is to present the window immediately again, but an
> unset_minimized won't do that. What if the window is on a different
> workspace, or has been
The lack of an unset_minimized feature is very intentional. The *goal*, it
sounds like, is to present the window immediately again, but an
unset_minimized won't do that. What if the window is on a different
workspace, or has been simply stacked behind another set of windows?
unset_minimized won't
Hi everybody, and thanks Phillippe for reacting to this topic,
Yes, we under Tizen are using xdg-shell for some of the great features it
has, and doing the integration in applications and toolkits such
Ozone-Wayland, Qt, EFL...
We were recently challenged by a feature needed in the Web runtime, w
We've gone through enough churn of xdg-shell that we're now feeling
confident enough to commit to this much. Let's do it.
Ok good news, I guess you're want to gather some feedback
before it lands into next release
As a qtwayland developer it seems ok for us
(note current master branch is align
We've gone through enough churn of xdg-shell that we're now feeling
confident enough to commit to this much. Let's do it.
The major version number is bumped to 2 because unfortunately we need to
remove the use_unstable_version API.
---
clients/simple-damage.c | 9 +--
clients/simple-egl.c
33 matches
Mail list logo
