collection of surfaces owned by a MirConnection << SurfaceSet?
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Alan Griffiths 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 Mir
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
On 02/06/14 10:08, Alan Griffiths wrote:
> With the current review of "trust session" it is clear that "Session" is
> a bad name for what the scene::Session class represents.
>
> I suggest that we rename it to "Application" as that seems to better
> reflect its role.
>
> Clearly that has the pote
