[PATCH wayland] protocol: Add set_xwayland request for new shell surface type

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 19:33:18 -0200
Tiago Vignatti <tiago.vignatti at linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On 12/14/2012 06:12 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:13:04 -0200
> > Tiago Vignatti <tiago.vignatti at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't see a problem on having xwayland typical applications linked
> >> with "desktop" style of interfaces. X11 and its WM standards are
> >> flexible enough for building different graphics interfaces and the
> >> wl_shell is the best at the moment to fitting them.
> >
> > Is calling the wl_shell interfaces limited to the X WM, or does the X
> > server call them? If they are limited to X WM, then it is very nice,
> > because for a different Wayland shell, you would have to have a
> > different X WM anyway.
> >
> > If the X server calls them, it could be awkward to extend to non-desktop
> > systems.
> >
> > Could that work? Does this make sense to tie Wayland shell with X WM,
> > and leave the X server things as shell and WM agnostic? Could everything
> > shell related be in the private X WM interface, including the
> > wl_shell_surface:set_xwayland?
> >
> > Or maybe that is how you already designed it, but I'm too lazy to look
> > it up in the patches. ;-)
> 
> scratch this all. Problem solved :)
> 
> set_xwayland request was not used at all by any client in fact. It's 
> only being used by xwayland compositor's internal glue 
> (window-manager.c), which is responsible for combining the information 
> from X server and xwm, and mapping accordingly on the screen. Check the 
> patch:
> 
> http://paste.ubuntu.com/1439867/
> 
> So two issues were raised on the review here: 1. set_xwayland exposed to 
> regular Wayland clients and 2. the core protocol being modified. Both 
> seems solved now.

Ok, will you rework the series to not need any changes in wayland.xml?


Thanks,
pq