Am Freitag, den 30.06.2017, 15:42 +0800 schrieb Jonas Ådahl: > On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:48:58AM +0200, Philipp Kerling wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Am Freitag, den 30.06.2017, 13:50 +0800 schrieb Jonas Ådahl: > > > Rename the interfaces according to the wayland-protocols policy. > > > Since > > > the name 'xdg_shell' as an interface was already taken (by > > > xdg-shell-unstable-v5) zxdg_shell_v6 was renamed xdg_wm_base. The > > > surface role related interfaces were not renamed, as naming > > > collision > > > is only unmanagable when exposed as globals via the registry. > > > > What about clients that want to support both xdg_shell (unstable > > v5) > > and xdg_wm_base? Won't they have a problem with > > A. clashing type/function/macro names in the header files > > generated by > > wayland-scanner, at least when they are including both > > headers in > > one file? > > B. clashing interface global names (e.g. > > "xdg_toplevel_interface") at > > link time even when they do not include both headers at the > > same > > time? > > Right. This means you can't have xdg_shell_unstable_v5 at the same > time > as xdg_wm_base, without messing around avoiding compiling and linking > issues. > > Personally I'd rather not support v5 instead of coming up with new > names > for everything; it *is* (was) an unstable protocol version and it has > always been expected that support for it will be removed. Yes I know, but the situation is that this particular unstable protocol practically had to be implemented to have a somewhat usable desktop experience due to the shortcomings of wl_shell.
> Do you know of > any client out in the wild that still only supports xdg_shell > unstable > v5? I was thinking more of e.g. Qt (or any other toolkit) that supports wl_shell, xdg_shell unstable v5 and v6 (albeit to a wildly differing extent sadly) and would now have to drop unstable v5 in order to support xdg_wm_base. Also, I think both KWin and Qt did only support unstable v5 until very recently. wl_shell is always available as fallback though. Do note that I am not personally opposed to saying that that's the way it is going to be, I just wanted to point this out since the commit message was a bit brief on the implications of keeping the interface names. If you have considered this and decided that people will have to drop v5 support (compositors as well as clients I presume) if they had it before, everything is fine by me. - Philipp _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
