Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-06 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 13:52:24 -0600 Derek Foreman wrote: > On 11/5/18 7:43 AM, Simon Ser wrote: > > On Monday, November 5, 2018 11:07 AM, Pekka Paalanen > > wrote: > >> How about writing what Derek said: that the old damage request may be > >> unoptimal rather than deprecated. > >> > >> I don't

Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-05 Thread Derek Foreman
On 11/5/18 7:43 AM, Simon Ser wrote: > On Monday, November 5, 2018 11:07 AM, Pekka Paalanen > wrote: >> How about writing what Derek said: that the old damage request may be >> unoptimal rather than deprecated. >> >> I don't like "deprecated" because to me it implies that this request >> will be

Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-05 Thread Simon Ser
On Monday, November 5, 2018 11:07 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > How about writing what Derek said: that the old damage request may be > unoptimal rather than deprecated. > > I don't like "deprecated" because to me it implies that this request > will be removed (i.e. can be left unimplemented) some

Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-05 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Mon, 05 Nov 2018 08:58:46 + Simon Ser wrote: > On Monday, November 5, 2018 9:44 AM, Pekka Paalanen > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > what good does this do, when no compositor can ever stop implementing it? > > > > I'm ok with adding a note that clients might have easier time using > > damage_buf

Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-05 Thread Simon Ser
On Monday, November 5, 2018 9:44 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: > Hi, > > what good does this do, when no compositor can ever stop implementing it? > > I'm ok with adding a note that clients might have easier time using > damage_buffer, but I don't see anything that would allow compositors to > do othe

Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-05 Thread Pekka Paalanen
On Sun, 04 Nov 2018 08:38:16 + Simon Ser wrote: > This commit deprecates wl_surface.damage in favor of wl_surface.damage_buffer. > > Having two requests makes it complicated for the compositor to handle damage, > making it necessary to transform one into the other's coordinates. > > Moreove

Re: [PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-04 Thread Derek Foreman
IMHO this is a win. Reviewed-by: Derek Foreman I think we can follow it up by removing surface damage in surface co-ordinates from weston clients - if we don't want people using it, we shouldn't be giving then good examples of how. I also think it's reasonable for compositor writers to take the

[PATCH] protocol: deprecate wl_surface.damage

2018-11-04 Thread Simon Ser
This commit deprecates wl_surface.damage in favor of wl_surface.damage_buffer. Having two requests makes it complicated for the compositor to handle damage, making it necessary to transform one into the other's coordinates. Moreover, integration with wp_viewporter is tricky. Signed-off-by: Simon