Hey Sergio, I am indescribably excited about this. It looks awesome. Just a few little quirks! Wayland is definitely the way forward. Please consider putting this up on in the repo on gna.org as this is an awesome development.
Gregory Casamento GNUstep Maintainer/Lead Developer greg_casamento (Skype) (240)274-9630 > On Jan 13, 2016, at 8:09 PM, Sergio L. Pascual <s...@sinrega.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > The past few nights, I've been playing around the idea of writing a > Wayland backend for GNUstep (this is my first time hacking on GS, > though I've contributed to other FOSS projects), first as a way of > getting to know Wayland, and later to explore the possibility of a pure > GNUstep Desktop Environment. > > So far, I've managed to write a functional prototype (consisting of a > GS backend and a slightly modified Weston shell) which implements some > basic window management. If you're curious, you can see a video from a > screen capture here: https://sinrega.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/gnu > step-wayland.webm > > It's a bit quirky, and the code is ugly, but as a prototype it serves > its purpose. Now I'm considering coding a clean implementation, if no > one else is already working on it. > > As GNUstep already has a Cairo backend, making it write to a Wayland > surface, showing something on the screen, is easy. The hard part comes > when you want to treat that surfaces as windows in the traditional > desktop paradigm, as the basic Wayland protocol lacks the functionality > required for this. > > So, I see three options for a GNUstep Wayland backend: > > 1. Use only the basic Wayland protocol. Not very useful, except for > very specific uses. > > 2. Use Wayland and Weston's XDG protocols. This would allow to > implement some window management, without window levels, ordering, nor > absolute window positioning. Also, all features which depend on > obtaining the location of the mouse would be broken too. > > 3. Use Wayland, Weston's XDG and some specific extensions, with a > GNUstep-aware Weston shell. This would allow to implement all the > functionality, and some nifty features like a static MainMenu and a > Dock-like panel. > > Personally, I'd go with 3. People only wanting to run a single app > would be still able to use the x11 backend, while the wayland backend > could be used to explore the possibility of a dedicated Desktop > Environment. > > Any thoughts on this? > > Sergio. > > > _______________________________________________ > Gnustep-dev mailing list > Gnustep-dev@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
