Hi Pekka, Hi Matt, I am also highly interested in a response. I spent a lot of effort by implementing this feature and also thinking about a reasonable solution. In the meantime I also published a reference implementation of an ivi-id-agent that is assigning ids to the created surfaces (see below). The wayland-ivi-extension community is also willing to add this implementation of the ivi-id-agent. Moreover AGL is already using my changes to introduce new features. I would appreciate, if people were using the official release of Weston instead of altering it to their needs by applying the changes, which were sent to the mailing list, themselves. I am highly motivated to work on my patches to fulfill your requirements to get them into mainline. Thanks in advance.
@Matt: Thanks for caring and pushing the topic. My changes are available on github: https://github.com/mtey/wayland-ivi-extension/tree/xdg_support_ivi_id_agent https://github.com/mtey/weston/tree/xdg_support_ivi_id_agent Best regards Michael Teyfel Engineering Software Base (ADITG/ESB) Tel. +49 5121 49 6932 > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Hoosier [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Freitag, 22. Dezember 2017 16:12 > To: Pekka Paalanen > Cc: Ucan, Emre (ADITG/ESB); [email protected]; Teyfel, > Michael (ADITG/ESB) > Subject: Re: [PATCH weston 00/14] Desktop Protocol Support for IVI-Shell > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:01:09 -0600 > > Matt Hoosier <[email protected]> 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. > >> > > >> > 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. > > > > Hi, > > > > I have a long reply brewing for that email and several points you > > raised, but I have not had the time to finish it yet. It is very time > > consuming to write the rebuttal for this proposal. > > > > > > Thanks, > > pq > > Hi Pekka, > > I'm still interested to hear your position here. If writing the full response > is > still prohibitive, could you maybe just confirm whether your stance is about > the technical nuts and bolts of how (or whether) the IVI shell can make a > conforming implementation of the desktop shell APIs, or whether you just > think it's wrong-headed for an IVI system to attempt to use code that was > developed with the nominal purpose of showing on a desktop system. _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
