Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> writes: > Make it simpler: all clients MUST be able to draw decorations. That's what > Wayland up until now requires anyway.
I think it's a shame to throw out the idea of making the policy be that clients are allowed to expect SSD if they don't want to draw decorations themselves. Requiring CSD support only makes it simpler for compositor developers, but it adds a lot of burden on things like SDL, glut and applications that really just want a space to render GL content into. I guess you could make a toolkit-agnostic decorations library using subsurfaces that these types of applications can use. However I don't think that will solve the consistency issue because most game-type applications will want to bundle all of their dependencies so they will end up wanting to bundle this library. The consistency will then break when the distro updates its version of the library. I think the most important decision to make for xdg-shell is whether to require CSD support or SSD support. How it is actually negotatied is not as important. I think you have to have a policy of requiring support for one or the other because it'd be a mess to have a situation where some apps can't work on certain compositors. If Gnome Shell doesn't add support for SSD then I suppose that effectively mandates CSD support in clients that want to be portable regardless of what is specified in xdg-shell. It looks like the main incentive to not require SSD support is that it creates work for the Gnome Shell developers. However you have to bear in mind that requiring CSD also creates work for all other toolkit developers which may turn out to be more work overall. Regards, - Neil
pgpUPMn3FzCC9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
