A barebone version of Weston?

[Pekka Paalanen]

Hi Nick,

On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:35:04 -0700
Mikalai Kisialiou <kisialiou at gmail.com> wrote:

> Pekka,
> 
> Thank you for your response. To clarify it, I am not developing another
> windowing interface that will compete with Weston or QT Compositor. My

If by windowing interface you mean a Wayland compositor, there is
nothing wrong in trying to write a "competing" compositor. In fact, it
is encouraged, if you for any reason cannot or do not want to
contribute to existing ones. Diversity gives more testing to the Wayland
design, and Weston was never meant to be the only compositor.

> application is completely different and the open source graphics driver
> stack is the likely bottleneck. I'm not even sure that Mesa/Gallium can
> give me the rendering speed that I need.

If you are going to apply Wayland on a completely different use case, I
think it would be interesting to hear about it. Even if it is something
that could never be even considered for upstreaming.

> Based on the responses I've received so far I think I understand now that
> the client interface is a much bigger concern for the Weston developers. I
> will simply clone my own copy of Weston as it exists today and will commit
> bug fixes only as needed. And yes, I want to keep it relatively "dead"
> because one man's dead fork is another man's stable source. ;)

Considering that even the very first version of the Wayland core
protocol is not quite stable yet, yes, the interfaces are being
concentrated on. And to my knowledge, shell interfaces (which provide
window management) are not even considered core at this time.

It is quite hard to discuss this in general terms, we don't know what
you are aiming for. If we knew, we could probably give more useful
responses.


Thanks,
pq