It could be that I'm confused, or it could be that we're confused. So I'm starting with a quick email. If need be I'll create a doc for discussion.
The current situation is that we have multiple incompatible representations of the display configuration: 1. MirDisplayConfiguration and the mir_display_config_... functions. 2. MirDisplayConfig and the mir_display_configuration_... functions. 3. The mir::graphics::DisplayConfiguration interface and the various platform implementations. It looks as though we have started to replace 1 with 2 but haven't yet finished. Looking at the code it seems the various platform implementations of 3 "just" populate similar data structures to provide the same functionality. I think there is enough commonality that a single internal implementation based on 2 could be used across server, platforms and clients. I'd go so far as to say that DisplayConfiguration is a concept that ought to be in libmircore (with a suitably ABI-stable API). There would be advantages to having a single representation (DRY) and, as servers, platforms and clients can operate in the same process, it is easier to use, -- Mir-devel mailing list Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
