On 11/7/17 6:01 PM, Matt Hoosier wrote:
Hi Pekka,
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Ucan, Emre (ADITG/ESB)
<[email protected]> wrote:
Actually, IMO ivi-shell is not a proper wayland compositor.
Because it is violating wayland protocol by not supporting wl_shell
interface.
The wl_shell protocol was designed for the desktop use case. So not
supporting it is perfectly fine on non-desktop.
Therefore, we have to at least support wl_shell interface in
ivi-shell. Why not support it via libweston-desktop ?
I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on this one specific point
that Emre made. I know there's a lot of heartburn over the inclusion
of wl_shell into the core protocol, and you wouldn't do it that way
if that decision were getting made today.
But given the history that actually happened, is there a reason not
to go ahead and allow the ivi-shell to implement wl_shell simply on
the grounds that it is part of the defined core protocol? I think
that some potentially reasonable answers were made above to your
concerns that the API offered by wl_shell targeted toward desktops
wouldn't be meaningful on an IVI system. All the mandatory
operations seem to be possible to support,
Except the current patch doesn’t say that. xdg_shell allows the
compositor to ignore the fullscreen/maximize requests. libweston-desktop
API was designed around xdg_shell, with best effort for wl_shell (and I
am in the process of fixing that). With wl_shell, the compositor cannot
deny the client the fullscreen or maximized state.
and the IVI shell just needs to come up with sensible definitions
(i.e., documented for its users) about how the anonymous wl_shell
clients' surfaces will be integrated with the explicit IVI clients.
Note, I'm not for the moment trying to expand this line of reasoning
into a grounds for justifying the support of xdg-shell. That
protocol is (deliberately) not part of the core, and I understand
that. If a magic wand were to be waved and use of libweston-desktop
didn't automatically mean that xdg-shell is supported too, would that
be tolerable?
xdg_shell was not added to core to avoid the wl_shell situation. We
cannot drop wl_shell support because it’s in core wayland.xml, and it’s
hurting us already, because wl_shell clients will always prevent a full
migration to xdg_shell. We are lucky that libweston-desktop (and others)
doesn’t need too much code to support it.
Thanks,
--
Quentin “Sardem FF7” Glidic
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
