On 07/04/2018 11:45 PM, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> Looks good to me, I think we can go with this. What Reviewed-by:s should
> I add, besides my own?
Reviewed-by: Eike Hein
> Jonas
Thanks,
Eike Hein
___
wayland-devel mailing list
wayl
Reviewed-by: Eike Hein
___
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
On May 8, 2018 6:23:30 PM GMT+09:00, "Jonas Ådahl" wrote:
>It is my opinion that we should continue with the scope described
>above,
>to make a clear separation between what portable clients can expect
>while expecting to work both on highly integrated environments and less
>integrated environmen
On 04/26/2018 07:49 AM, Nicholas Bishop wrote:
> My question is, does that work in practice? Do most applications
> actually set the application ID as suggested?
KDE/Qt and Gnome/GTK apps generally do. We've had to poke a few
apps in the broader ecosystem to fix things, but overall things
are a
Simon Ser
> Reviewed-by: Drew DeVault
> Reviewed-by: David Edmundson
> Reviewed-by: Alan Griffiths
> Reviewed-by: Tony Crisci
Forgotten in my previous reply:
Reviewed-by: Eike Hein
Cheers,
Eike Hein
___
wayland-devel mailing list
+1
I quite like this one. It's the best version so far.
Cheers,
Eike
___
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
>> If server and client do not negotiate the use of a server-side
>> decoration using this protocol, clients continue to self-decorate as
>> they see fit."
>
> The wording here is weird, and I want to avoid the word decorate. What
> the client does is not necessarily decorate. The reason why clien
How about:
And as description:
"This interface allows a server to announce support for server-side
decorations and optionally express a preference for using them.
A client can use this protocol to request being decorated by a
supporting server.
If server and client do not negotiate the use
On 03/18/2018 03:55 PM, Markus Ongyerth wrote:
>> a) Change the definition of "decoration" to "window controls as deemed
>> appropriate by the compositor, for example ...". This leaves what's in a
>> server-side deco and what's in a client-side deco up to servers and
>> clients, respectively, and
On 03/18/2018 10:45 PM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> That strikes me as a problem. So what can we do to bridge the gap
> between these projects?
FWIW, I agree this is a problem. KDE's Wayland contributor base is
slowly growing, though - we have more people working on Wayland stuff
than we had previousl
On 03/16/2018 12:43 AM, Daniel Stone wrote:> No, it really has. GTK+ has
always - well, until you got the patches
> for this protocol merged a month or two ago - decorated its own
> windows under Wayland. Same with Qt. Same with EFL. These are toolkits
> which have been around and deployed for se
11 matches
Mail list logo
