On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutte...@who-t.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 09:46:36PM +0000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > > + If a seat regains the pointer capability and a client has a > pointer > > > + object obtained previously, that object may start sending > pointer > > > + events. This behavior is implementation-dependent and must not > be > > > + relied upon. > > > > Urgh, I don't really like having this there as a bit of a get-out > > clause. Can we just strengthen the 'client should destroy the > > wl_pointer objects' to a 'must'? Especially since this paragraph > > contradicts the immediately previous one ('No further pointer events > > will be received on these objects'). Maybe we could fold bits of this > > paragraph in to replace that problematic sentence, but couple with a > > recommendation that compositors should not send events to stale > > objects - and bump that to a must for compositors advertising whatever > > our next version of wl_seat ends up being. > > if the per-version behaviour works correctly we can add this, otherwise we > still have to keep this paragraph in, otherwise we're retroactively > disallowing current working implementations. The same goes for the > should/must, we already have implementations doing this. > I don't think you want this text. An existing implementation that sends pointer events after the loss/gain is broken. People wrote lots of other bugs into existing implementations, that does not mean all descriptions have to allow any existing bug. A more practical reason for being more insistent is that if a popular compositor does this, it is quite likely to be relied on by some clients (due to the fact that it is much easier to write a client that relies on this), quickly leading to this being a required behaviour of all compositors. Explicitly saying that is wrong may encourage the compositors to not do this, though of course it does not guarantee it.
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel