Hi On 5 March 2015 at 20:09, Emmanuele Bassi <eba...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 5 March 2015 at 19:17, Florian Müllner <fmuell...@gnome.org> wrote: >>>> What about apps that rely on CSD for part of their UI? Will those have the >>>> final word as well, or are they just screwed? >>> >>> The same as now without a compositor :) > > a) X11 without a compositor is a deeply uninteresting case; I'd go as > far as saying that if you're running X11 without a compositor you're > basically asking for a broken system
I am not sure I am following you here, but people do run WM without a compositor, it is a reality. And GTK supports that, at least up until now, and that's fine by me. > b) not having a compositor is not at all equivalent to changing a UI > from a CSD to a SSD scenario. The UI *changes*, even in drastic ways > for the user interaction. The application has to be informed about it, > and has to be designed with those two cases in mind. It has to ship > with two fairly different sets of UIs. It already happens for menus, > but you'll have to convince application developers to ship those two > UIs, maintain them, and keep them from going out of sync. Your idea > stops at providing a patch for a hint. You're vastly underestimating > the effort that such hint entails on the larger ecosystem. But it's already the case, I am not advocating to reinvent the entire ecosystem of UI interactions here, I am merely asking if a setting to help GTK decide to go CSD or SSD instead of just detecting the presence of the compositor alone would be interesting... Cheers, Olivier _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
