On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Giulio Camuffo <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2014-10-29 8:45 GMT+02:00 Imran Zaman <[email protected]>: > > Daniel! > > > > As per your logic, I see wl_list APIs exposed etc, which shouldn't be > part > > of libwayland as well. > > similarly, wl_fixed_to_double and wl_array shouldn't be part of the > window > > system. Isnt it? > > I can make inline functions if that helps. > > wl_list is used in the server side API, so it's a bit different. > However, I'd agree that it'd be better if it wasn't exposed but we > can't remove it now. wl_fixed is a wayland specific type so all the > wl_fixed_* functions need to be part of the API. > On the other hand wl_strtol would just be a function, there are is no > other API that depends on it. > > > > > Btw here is an API patch, which has not be reviewed till now. > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2014-October/017833.html > > Yes, like there are many other patches waiting for reviews. You need > to have patience, it's not like we are ignoring it. But, if I may add, > the way you are reacting to a comment to this patch doesn't encourage > to review your other ones. > > > Neither the random/comments to the patch are encouraging :-) e.g. "AOL. We're a window system, not a replacement libc." Its your choice to review it or not; I did not put the API patch link here just because it has not been reviewed. I have lots of patience but Tizen may need something urgent or else we may need to fork wayland/weston in Tizen. I put it in the thread because Daniel said that we did not have any further progress/discussion on that end. Anyways I take the patch off, as it does not "sound" like it should be here to save everyone's time. If the time allows, I will remove it from public APIs in addition to one critical bug fix and resubmit the patch. > -- > Giulio > > > > > BR > > imran > > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 28 October 2014 15:40, Imran Zaman <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> You guys should check the reason why the patch is there rather than > >>> throwing out random thoughts or blunt comments. > >>> > >>> I did this patch mainly because weston/wayland has been using > >>> strtol/strtoul functions in number of places with buggy error checks, > and > >>> duplicate code everywhere. Weston and wayland go together; so in bigger > >>> picture, its a very useful patch IMO.. I hardly find any patches with > proper > >>> tests, but I did it so to make it more effective. But I guess in > >>> wayland/weston community, only maintainers are allowed to push patches > >>> others are strongly discouraged to do so. I guess its better to > encourage > >>> people/community for giving helping hand. > >>> > >>> Anyways we will now only push patches (including multi-seat support) in > >>> Tizen weston/wayland rather than wasting time in upstreamn > weston/wayland as > >>> it seems to be long bureaucratic process to overcome with virtually no > >>> success. > >> > >> > >> That's not what we've said. No-one said 'don't take the patch'; all we > >> said is 'please don't expose it as part of libwayland-*'s _public_ API'. > >> > >> I like the idea of the patch, I like how it's caught a number of buggy > >> spots where we've open-coded the same thing, and I like that it's > >> well-tested. For internal usage, it's great! I just don't want to expose > >> string manipulation functions in the public API of a window system. > >> > >> You're right that the test infrastructure is in a pretty bad state. > >> Anything which helps that is more than welcome, and you may have seen a > >> bunch of patches from Derek Foreman (not a maintainer) on this list, > which > >> are progressing well and go a long way towards improving our test suite > into > >> something that will be really useful day to day. Any further > contributions > >> along those lines - from anyone - are totally welcome. > >> > >> As for your multiseat patches, the last discussions I remember involved > >> some pretty fundamental disagreements about the whole architecture, > >> particularly input support. I haven't seen any more patches or > discussion > >> since the last IRC chat, though. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Daniel > >> > > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On 28 October 2014 15:40, Imran Zaman <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> You guys should check the reason why the patch is there rather than > >>> throwing out random thoughts or blunt comments. > >>> > >>> I did this patch mainly because weston/wayland has been using > >>> strtol/strtoul functions in number of places with buggy error checks, > and > >>> duplicate code everywhere. Weston and wayland go together; so in bigger > >>> picture, its a very useful patch IMO.. I hardly find any patches with > proper > >>> tests, but I did it so to make it more effective. But I guess in > >>> wayland/weston community, only maintainers are allowed to push patches > >>> others are strongly discouraged to do so. I guess its better to > encourage > >>> people/community for giving helping hand. > >>> > >>> Anyways we will now only push patches (including multi-seat support) in > >>> Tizen weston/wayland rather than wasting time in upstreamn > weston/wayland as > >>> it seems to be long bureaucratic process to overcome with virtually no > >>> success. > >> > >> > >> That's not what we've said. No-one said 'don't take the patch'; all we > >> said is 'please don't expose it as part of libwayland-*'s _public_ API'. > >> > >> I like the idea of the patch, I like how it's caught a number of buggy > >> spots where we've open-coded the same thing, and I like that it's > >> well-tested. For internal usage, it's great! I just don't want to expose > >> string manipulation functions in the public API of a window system. > >> > >> You're right that the test infrastructure is in a pretty bad state. > >> Anything which helps that is more than welcome, and you may have seen a > >> bunch of patches from Derek Foreman (not a maintainer) on this list, > which > >> are progressing well and go a long way towards improving our test suite > into > >> something that will be really useful day to day. Any further > contributions > >> along those lines - from anyone - are totally welcome. > >> > >> As for your multiseat patches, the last discussions I remember involved > >> some pretty fundamental disagreements about the whole architecture, > >> particularly input support. I haven't seen any more patches or > discussion > >> since the last IRC chat, though. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Daniel > > > > >
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
