Re: [RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-10-08 Thread Jasper St. Pierre
Mir seems to be pushing forward with their compositor-based attachment protocol, and if they've analyzed it and established that it covers most cases, I'm totally fine with us taking that. Descriptive, not prescriptive :) On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi, > > On 1 October

Re: [RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-10-08 Thread Daniel Stone
Hi, On 1 October 2015 at 07:51, Jonas Ådahl wrote: > The are a few problems with this approach, such as: > > 1) It requires an extra roundtrip to create a popup/tooltip (not that > big of a deal though, I'd say). > 2) When the parent surface has non-trivial transformations (non-90 > degree rotati

Re: [RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-10-02 Thread Bill Spitzak
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Jonas Ådahl wrote: > > I think that if we want to make it possible to change the relative > position of a popup/tooltip/popover in response to the parent surface > moving (like keeping a popover inside the visible area) we really should > use the second approach. I

Re: [RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-10-01 Thread Jonas Ådahl
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 01:04:34PM +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote: > Hey Jonas!, > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Jonas Ådahl wrote: > > wl_probe_visible (for now _wl_probe_visible) is a reintroduction of > > the "wl_probe" method of making it possible to position a surface so > > that it is com

Re: [RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-10-01 Thread Bill Spitzak
I don't see anything wrong with the compositor selecting the position for popups, and really don't see any way this "probe" idea can do better. This will avoid round trips, and also allow the compositor to move the popups if other obscuring objects appear after they are created. There are a few req

Re: [RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-10-01 Thread Carlos Garnacho
Hey Jonas!, On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Jonas Ådahl wrote: > wl_probe_visible (for now _wl_probe_visible) is a reintroduction of > the "wl_probe" method of making it possible to position a surface so > that it is completely visible, when positioning it relative to some > other already mapped

[RFC 1/2] Introduce wl_probe_visible protocol

2015-09-30 Thread Jonas Ådahl
wl_probe_visible (for now _wl_probe_visible) is a reintroduction of the "wl_probe" method of making it possible to position a surface so that it is completely visible, when positioning it relative to some other already mapped surface. It works by checking what parts of a rectangle relative to an ex