collection of surfaces owned by a MirConnection <<==== SurfaceSet?
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Alan Griffiths <alan.griffi...@canonical.com > wrote: > On 03/06/14 15:39, Gerry Boland wrote: > > Your reasons for why Session is a bad name would help the discussion. > > Because it is the collection of surfaces owned by a MirConnection - and > "session" doesn't convey *any* of that. > > > I've always thought that since Mir is a server, why not refer to clients > > as "Client" - > > Currently there is no representation of a "client" in Mir - nor is there > a simple way to identify one: We do try to identify the PID of the > process talking over a socket but there are limits to that. > > > I interpret Application as a client that creates a window > > for a user to interact with - but configuration tools & snapshotting > > tools may not create a window (i.e. for scripting) > > -G > > OK, so "Application" might not be a good name either. > > And, if you move onto the desktop, an application can have more than one > windows for a user to interact with. > > -- > Mir-devel mailing list > Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel > -- Cemil Azizoglu Mir Display Server - Team Lead Canonical USA
-- Mir-devel mailing list Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
