Hello Armin, Excellent update, that split between main goal and stretch goals is what I had in mind, much better.
Do you think you could elaborate or be more specific in the timeline about the time each step will take? For example this is a good proposal timeline https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jQTZMapxnfJGxFH425kECjcWIUHrJhEMLI_C5Re9D-Q/edit Again I understand timeline for this project is hard, but a rough "this will take around 3 weeks" or so for the steps would be much better. Carlos Soriano On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Armin Krezović <krezovic.ar...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 27.03.2017 20:20, Owen Taylor wrote: > > Hi Armin - > > > > Hello, > > > Thanks for being interested in Mutter and putting forward this proposal! > > > > One thing you need to realize is that this is a really hard development > task. Without really working through the details, my guess is that getting > GNOME to the point where it can start without an Xwayland server running is > 3-6 months of full time work for an experienced GNOME Shell developer - > someone who has been working on this code for years. > > > There are several major challenges: > > > > 1. The GTK+ backend challenge. Mutter and GNOME Shell use various GTK+ > APIs. They use the X11 backend of GTK+ - which requires an X connection. > Using the Wayland backend to GTK+ would make no sense. So you'd either have > to remove all usage of GTK+ or add some sort of custom GNOME-private > backend to GTK+. > > 2. The code reorganization challenge. You'll simply need to move a lot > of stuff around. > > 3. Lots of different types of residual X usage within Mutter, GNOME > Shell and GNOME more broadly that need to be addressed one by one > > > > I was already told that. Original goals included far more than it could > possibly be done by me in the GSoC period. > It was trimmed down to just one goal and that is to make libmutter and an > example compositor not require XWayland, > ie move a lot of code around so it runs only when XWayland is available. > > > I think that a successful SOC project could be done around this subject, > but you need to be pretty realistic about what you can accomplish - you > should think of the outputs being: > > > > A) Documentation of the challenges > > B) Documentation of possible approaches to each challenge, what works > and what doesn't work > > C) A successful prototype that shows Mutter starting up. > > > > Yes, this is the idea. I have updated my proposal to reflect this. Blog > updates will come weekly, with information > about past week challenges and accomplishments. > > > I would consider having a branch of Mutter code that is ready to be > merged very much a stretch goal. > > > > I like that you are focusing initially on just Mutter - while there are > additional challenges within GNOME Shell and the GNOME Desktop environment > that will affect how work on Mutter is done starting with just Mutter > definitely keeps things more doable. > > > > You'll also need to line up a possible mentor - probably one of Florian, > Jonas, Rui, or Carlos Garnacho (or Jasper, but he doesn't have much time > for Mutter work these days.) > > > > As outlined in my proposal, Jonas and Carlos Garnacho have volounteered to > be my mentors before I wrote the proposal. > > > - Owen > > > Thank you for taking your time to reply. > > > _______________________________________________ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > >
_______________________________________________ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
