To clarify, the desired behaviour /can/ be implemented client-side with the existing Mir API. This would require implementation code in each toolkit (or client). The limitation of this approach being that the shell isn't required to respect set_state() requests issued by the client.
We /can/ also implement the same client-side logic in Mir which would need a new API. This would make it independent of toolkit (but the toolkits would need to invoke the new API). We can also implement the logic on the server side which would also need a new API. It would also allow the shell to make a better decisions about how to respect the client request. The best trade-off between these implementations isn't clear to me. (Yet!) What to call the requested "fullscreen or restored" behaviour is unclear to me, but "automatic" seems both misleading and unclear. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1535397 Title: [enhancement] Implement support for QWindow::visibility set to Automatic To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/avila/+bug/1535397/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
