On Friday, June 14, 2013 11:41:29 AM Marc Deslauriers wrote: > On 13-06-14 11:33 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Friday, June 14, 2013 11:15:17 AM Marc Deslauriers wrote: > >> On 13-06-14 11:04 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > >>> On Friday, June 14, 2013 03:54:32 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: > >>>> Here's a discussion I half started as part of vUDS. > >>>> > >>>> The switch to Mir in Ubuntu seems pretty risky for the existance of > >>>> Kubuntu, I wonder if other flavours have the same probable problem. > >>>> > >>>> KWin dev has opinions on the subject > >>>> http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2013/05/mir-in-kubuntu/ From the > >>>> > >>>> architecture section on that blog post: > >>>> "Mir’s architecture is centered around Unity. It is difficult to > >>>> really > >>>> understand the architecture of Mir as the specification is so full of > >>>> buzz-words that I don’t understand it [5]. From all I can see and > >>>> understand Unity Next is a combination of window manager and desktop > >>>> shell implemented on top of Mir. How exactly this is going to look > >>>> like I do not know. Anyway it does not fit our design of having > >>>> desktop shell and window manager separated and we do not know whether > >>>> Mir would support that. We also do not know whether Mir would allow > >>>> any other desktop shell except Unity Next, given that this is the main > >>>> target. Wayland on the other hand is designed to have more than one > >>>> compositor implementations. Using KWin as a session compositor is an > >>>> example in the spec." > >>>> > >>>> and on protocol > >>>> > >>>> "But it gets worse, the protocol between Mir server and Mir clients > >>>> is defined as not being stable. In fact it’s promised that it will > >>>> break. That’s a huge problem, I would even call it a showstopper.... > >>>> Given that the protocol may change any time and given that the whole > >>>> thing is developed for the needs of Unity we have to expect that the > >>>> server libraries are not binary compatible or that old version of the > >>>> server libraries cannot talk with the latest client libraries" > >>>> > >>>> Canonical was going to port LightDM to Wayland but now does not plan > >>>> to so someone else would have to do this. KDE might be interested > >>>> but more likely will switch to SDDM. > >>>> > >>>> For Kubuntu the options are: > >>>> - Use Mir - infeasable as upstream can't support it as described above > >>>> - Use Wayland with packages from Debian and hope we can make those > >>>> packages > >>>> > >>>> live with Mir as best as possible > >>>> > >>>> - End of Kubuntu > >>>> > >>>> The second options is the one I'm expecting. It's completely unknown > >>>> how much it means Kubuntu and other flavours will need to maintain X > >>>> and Wayland packages, hopefully not much (it's hardly our speciality) > >>>> and hopefully Debian and Ubuntu Desktop will support it enough. > >>>> > >>>> I don't think there's a public timeline for Mir so we don't know when > >>>> this will hit us, presumably in the next year. > >>>> > >>>> Other flavours I think are this: > >>>> Mythbuntu: not evaluated, hope to do so once NVideo and AMD provide > >>>> drivers > >>>> Lubuntu: not evaluated, hope to use X and GTK > >>>> ubuntustudio: I've heard both that they use xfce based on xubuntu and > >>>> will follow them, and "aiming for users to choose whatever desktop > >>>> environment they want" > >>>> > >>>> Any other flavours got an opinions? > >>>> > >>>> Are there any misconceptions I have in the above? > >>> > >>> Given that mesa is going to be heavily patched to support Mir, I > >>> question > >>> the long term feasibility of supporting Wayland in Ubuntu. > >> > >> How would adding a new backend to mesa result in it being "heavily > >> patched"? Why would adding a new backend to mesa affect the other > >> backends, including Wayland? > > > > Upstream kwin tells us they already see bug reports from Kubuntu users due > > to mesa changes to support Unity. I don't think it's just a new back > > end. > Oh? That's quite odd, I don't see any Unity patches in the mesa package > in saucy. There are a couple of build fixes, and other trivial things, > but nothing that should be problematic. > > Do you have any more details, or opened bugs about the issues?
I don't. I don't know a lot about the display stack details. I'm basing this on feedback from kwin upstream. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
