<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>The lack of an unset_minimized feature is very intentional. The *goal*, it sounds like, is to present the window immediately again, but an unset_minimized won't do that. What if the window is on a different workspace, or has been simply stacked behind another set of windows? </div>unset_minimized won't solve any of these issues. Destroying and creating an xdg_surface will, certainly. </div>If there's a valid use case, and I'm *very* skeptical that there is, I would be fine in "present_window" request that tries as hard as possible to present the window to the user (unminimizing, changing workspaces, stacking to the top). However, I do want to make the guarantee that it isn't immediate. Compositors may implement this request by instead showing a blinking icon in the taskbar, to prevent an application from suddenly stealing the user's focus. </div>So, what is the use case for unset_minimized? </div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Philippe Coval <<a href="mailto:philippe.coval@open.eurogiciel.org" target="_blank">philippe.coval@open.eurogiciel.org</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> We've gone through enough churn of xdg-shell that we're now feeling confident enough to commit to this much. Let's do it. </blockquote> </div> Ok good news, I guess you're want to gather some feedback before it lands into next release As a qtwayland developer it seems ok for us (note current master branch is aligned to latest release wl-1.5) may giucam confirm too, I'll probably upgrade to 1.6 soon or later... But as mentionned in <a href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53214" target="_blank">https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53214</a> We at Tizen feels the unset_minimized request is missing (may it be part of the states enum too ?) If we compare to maximize both are there : <request name="set_maximized" /> <request name="unset_maximized" /> While there is only : <request name="set_minimized" /> Would it make sense to add this one : <request name="unset_minimized" /> I supose it's not there because there is no real need, but it wasnt intentional please confirm ? We can share some patches if it maters. To be tracked here and at : <a href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53214" target="_blank">https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53214</a> Regards -- mailto:<a href="mailto:philippe.coval@eurogiciel.fr" target="_blank">philippe.coval@eurogiciel.fr</a> -- gpg:0x467094BC <a href="mailto:xmpp%3Aphilippe.coval.pro@gmail.com" target="_blank">xmpp:philippe.coval.pro@gmail.com</a> <a href="https://dockr.eurogiciel.fr/blogs/embedded/author/pcl/" target="_blank">https://dockr.eurogiciel.fr/blogs/embedded/author/pcl/</a> . _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list <a href="mailto:wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" target="_blank">wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org</a> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel</a> </blockquote></div> -- Jasper </div>