On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:26:05 +0800
Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 02:44:15PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> > one remaining question I have though: what are we to do with changes to the
> > wayland protocol itself, e.g. the pointer axis changes. There are a few that
>
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 02:44:15PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
>
> one remaining question I have though: what are we to do with changes to the
> wayland protocol itself, e.g. the pointer axis changes. There are a few that
> cannot be easily added as separate interface, do we bite the bullet th
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:41:31PM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I implemented one of the brought up ideas to see how it'd work.
> More specifically, I created a repository called "wayland-protocols"[0]
> and adapted weston[1] to use it for the fullscreen shell. I also added
> pointer
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:18:47 +0800
Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:07:19AM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:24:04 +0100
> > Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > > On 9 October 2015 at 14:36, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Danie
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:07:19AM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:24:04 +0100
> Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > On 9 October 2015 at 14:36, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> > >> >> > I still have the '_' prefix which, men
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 15:24:04 +0100
Daniel Stone wrote:
> On 9 October 2015 at 14:36, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >> >> > I still have the '_' prefix which, mentioned by Pekka, violates some
> >> >> > rule in C. I'm not sure we need to ca
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 05:31:10PM +0200, Mariusz Ceier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 9 October 2015 at 15:36, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On 9 October 2015 at 11:15, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 12:36:
Hi,
On 9 October 2015 at 15:36, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 9 October 2015 at 11:15, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 12:36:54PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:41:31 +0800
> > >>
Hi,
On 9 October 2015 at 14:36, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
>> Excellent. One really important thing I think to have would be some
>> documentation around the protocol: what are the known open issues /
>> missing pieces / pitfalls? What is th
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 02:11:28PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 9 October 2015 at 11:15, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 12:36:54PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> >> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:41:31 +0800
> >> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> >> > I implemented one of the brought up ide
Hi,
On 9 October 2015 at 11:15, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 12:36:54PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:41:31 +0800
>> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>> > I implemented one of the brought up ideas to see how it'd work.
>> > More specifically, I created a repository call
Hi,
On 8 October 2015 at 21:43, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
>> The issues I had with earlier xdg-shell development mostly centred
>> around your frustration with bikeshedding leading to pulling out of
>> all discussion and just periodically pus
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 12:36:54PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:41:31 +0800
> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>
> > Hi again,
> >
> > I implemented one of the brought up ideas to see how it'd work.
> > More specifically, I created a repository called "wayland-protocols"[0]
> > and ada
On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 14:41:31 +0800
Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I implemented one of the brought up ideas to see how it'd work.
> More specifically, I created a repository called "wayland-protocols"[0]
> and adapted weston[1] to use it for the fullscreen shell. I also added
> pointer gestu
Hi all,
I'm not sure how much of this was directed at me, if any, but I feel
like I should state my position.
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 13:43:06 -0700
"Jasper St. Pierre" wrote:
> ... snip ...
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >> This is what I believe we lost when Kristia
Hi again,
I implemented one of the brought up ideas to see how it'd work.
More specifically, I created a repository called "wayland-protocols"[0]
and adapted weston[1] to use it for the fullscreen shell. I also added
pointer gestures to make it obvious that its not only protocols that are
impleme
... snip ...
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> That's a fair (and accurate) criticism, but again I don't think that
> needs one big cheese. There are quite a few people here who I think
> are fairly empowered to shut down discussions that rathole into
> totally unrela
Hi,
On 8 October 2015 at 17:35, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> My issue with this whole "we don't have a maintainer" thing is that we
> don't have someone to make a decision. I have lots of patches and
> ideas that I'd love to contribute (and have attempted in the past),
> but usually the result is t
My issue with this whole "we don't have a maintainer" thing is that we
don't have someone to make a decision. I have lots of patches and
ideas that I'd love to contribute (and have attempted in the past),
but usually the result is that there's some bikeshedding and
discussion on the list, and then
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:14:26PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi Jonas,
>
> On 18 September 2015 at 08:00, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > Right now, the way to get a protocol officially declared stable is, more
> > or less, to implement it in weston, wait for a while maybe making
> > changes, and then
On 29 September 2015 at 21:14, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On 18 September 2015 at 08:00, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>> The main issue, I believe, is that we lack defined procedure and agreed
>> upon requirements for what may actually be placed in such a repository. I
>> don't think it makes sense to have a sa
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:18:52PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 29 September 2015 at 20:26, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> > I would like to throw the idea of holding a regular
> > conference/meeting/bof though, I think it's a nice way to passively
> > check the state of development around o
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 05:34:41PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
> Leaving the more mechanical issue of how we deal with extension
> development for the moment ...
>
> > I don't think we've really had a maintainer since krh. I tried to take
> > over reviewing and releasing things and got exhaust
Hi,
On 29 September 2015 at 21:18, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
>> It's probably most helpful to look at the context in which we had our
>> maintainers, and the way Wayland development has ebbed and flowed. krh
>> was building Wayland quite litera
Hi,
On 29 September 2015 at 20:26, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> I would like to throw the idea of holding a regular
> conference/meeting/bof though, I think it's a nice way to passively
> check the state of development around other areas, seeing working code
> in action without keeping track of extra
Hey Daniel,
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,
> Leaving the more mechanical issue of how we deal with extension
> development for the moment ...
>
> On 29 September 2015 at 14:53, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:02:52 +0200
>> Carlos Garnacho wrote:
>>>
Hi Jonas,
On 18 September 2015 at 08:00, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> Right now, the way to get a protocol officially declared stable is, more
> or less, to implement it in weston, wait for a while maybe making
> changes, and then when agreed upon moved to the wayland repository. While
> being in weston,
Hey Pekka,
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> > Whoever is a known expert on that area.
>> >
>> > Who decides who is an expert? Uhh...
>>
>> It wouldn't be good if every maintainer thinks like that :), even
>> worse if that results in no action taken... I understand the
Hi,
Leaving the more mechanical issue of how we deal with extension
development for the moment ...
On 29 September 2015 at 14:53, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:02:52 +0200
> Carlos Garnacho wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> > Technically, peopl
On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 14:02:52 +0200
Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> Hi Pekka,
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:44:16 +0800
> > Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> >> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:
Hi Pekka,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:44:16 +0800
> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:00:19 +0800
>> > Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I'd like
On 20/09/15 10:49 PM, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 08:28:08PM -0700, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> We can pick any number of strategies to deal with unstable protocols.
>> We can give it a special name, we can say that any version < 1000 is
>> considered unstable, we can use a special
On 18/09/15 11:12 AM, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> 2015-09-18 17:44 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:00:19 +0800
>>> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>>>
Hi,
I'd like to start a discussion on the state of how developm
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 22:44:16 +0800
Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:00:19 +0800
> > Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'd like to start a discussion on the state of how development of Wayland
> > > interf
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 08:28:08PM -0700, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> We can pick any number of strategies to deal with unstable protocols.
> We can give it a special name, we can say that any version < 1000 is
> considered unstable, we can use a special request. That's not too
> important -- we're
We can pick any number of strategies to deal with unstable protocols.
We can give it a special name, we can say that any version < 1000 is
considered unstable, we can use a special request. That's not too
important -- we're all aware of how to implement that.
The more important issue, for me, at l
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:35:19AM +0300, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> 2015-09-19 4:24 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 07:12:10PM +0300, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> >> 2015-09-18 17:44 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
> >> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> >
> >
2015-09-19 4:24 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 07:12:10PM +0300, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
>> 2015-09-18 17:44 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
>> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>
>
>
>> >>
>> >> What do you do when you do a backward-incompatible change to
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 07:12:10PM +0300, Giulio Camuffo wrote:
> 2015-09-18 17:44 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> >>
> >> What do you do when you do a backward-incompatible change to a protocol?
> >>
> >> - Rename the globals or the
2015-09-18 17:44 GMT+03:00 Jonas Ådahl :
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:00:19 +0800
>> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I'd like to start a discussion on the state of how development of Wayland
>> > interfaces are done and how th
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 04:35:52PM +0300, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:00:19 +0800
> Jonas Ådahl wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to start a discussion on the state of how development of Wayland
> > interfaces are done and how they should be done, though less about the
> > tec
On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:00:19 +0800
Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to start a discussion on the state of how development of Wayland
> interfaces are done and how they should be done, though less about the
> technical aspect of it.
>
> Right now, the way to get a protocol officially declar
Hi,
I'd like to start a discussion on the state of how development of Wayland
interfaces are done and how they should be done, though less about the
technical aspect of it.
Right now, the way to get a protocol officially declared stable is, more
or less, to implement it in weston, wait for a whil
43 matches
Mail list logo
