Hi, On 2 May 2013 19:06, Bill Spitzak <spit...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pekka Paalanen wrote: >> So it's really a question whether we can require all compositors to >> unconditionally support crop&scale. And that really means *all* Wayland >> compositors forever, since wl_surface is core protocol. > > I see no reason not to make this a requirement. You already require 90 > degree rotations and ortogonal reflections (since clients can set the buffer > transform) and weston uses arbitrary transforms to rotate windows. And you > require ARGB32 support even if the hardware does not like it. > > I also think all of wl_shell should be a core requirement.
Not all compositors are user sessions. Think about nested compositors for browsers, or capture, or also very stripped-down usecases where they really don't want to have to deal with this kind of thing. I don't think it's an unreasonable requirement, and really like the design it has at the moment, where attaching the scaler object suppresses the resize-on-attach behaviour, and destroying it reverts to previous. It's pretty elegant, and totally in the vein of wl_shell_surface stacking on top of wl_surface. I don't see how inventing more elaborate extension mechanisms on top of our existing extension mechanism helps anything. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel