[PATCH 2/2] protocol: add state set functions for maximized and fullscreen.
Jasper St. Pierre
jstpierre at mecheye.net
Sat Nov 2 17:02:00 CET 2013
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net>wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Jasper St. Pierre <jstpierre at mecheye.net>wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Jason Ekstrand <jason at jlekstrand.net>wrote:
>> ... snip
>>> Thank you very much for your e-mail. I think that helps a lot. The
>>> lack of code is ok because I think Rafael is planning to start implementing
>>> as soon as things settle a bit. Sometimes protocol discussions can end up
>>> with a whole lot of hypotheticals and what you gave was a very clear
>>> concise discussion of the topic.
>>> If I am understanding you correctly, what we need are an "activate"
>>> request and "notify_active" and "notify_inactive" events. To support
>>> sloppy focus, clients should just always try to activate on
>>> wl_pointer.enter and let the compositor sort it out unless they have a good
>>> reason to do otherwise. For cases such as alt-tab, or another window
>>> closing, the compositor simply sends a notify_active. I think I'm ok with
>>> Two more questions that come to mind:
>>> 1) Will we ever need a deactivate request? Under the given scheme, no
>>> need comes immediately to mind.
>> No. Well, if we need it, let's add it later.
>> 2) Should the activate be associated with a particular seat. If you have
>>> multiple cursors, you can easily have multiple active windows so this seems
>>> perfectly reasonable. If this is the case, should this be part of wl_seat
>>> or should we keep it in xdg_shell? I'm a little afraid to clutter wl_seat
>>> unnecessarily but this is very quickly starting to look like a seat focus.
>> I don't think windows need to know which seat they're active on, only
>> that they're active on possibly one of them. From my eyes, there's nothing
>> that prevents the compositor to send "notify_active" to more than one
>> window at the same time for multiseat support.
>> If I click on an unresponsive window A, we'll send a "click" event to
>> that window, but since it's unresponsive, it won't activate. I might then
>> decide to activate another window B, which will respond. When the window A
>> becomes responsive again, it will process the "click" event and decide to
>> send an "activate" request back. We need to make sure that this "rogue"
>> client doesn't steal the focus, so the compositor needs to record the
>> serial for the last "activate" event it got (sent by window B), and compare
>> against it when it gets an "activate" event, besides whatever policies it
>> might have.
> Here is the problem. Say you have two pointers P and Q and two and two
> windows A and B. P clicks on A and A a is now active. Q clicks on B and
> now B is active. Then P goes and clicks on B. However, B is already
> active so it doesn't request an activation and A stays active with pointer
> P. This assumes we are trusting clients to request activation. The other
> option is that we simply force a click-always-activates model and clients
> are constantly fighting the compositor just to make modal dialogues work.
"Already active"? All "notify active" means is "please draw me with a
focused frame". The client should send an "activate" request on every
button press if it wants to be focused when something clicks on it.
As has said before, click-always-activate is broken: if I have window A
activate, and I want to drag something from window B onto window A, we
shouldn't activate window B on click.
>> But serials are seat-specific, so we need the "activate" request to relay
>> the seat back for the purposes of validating the timestamp. I don't think
>> it makes sense to expose the active window on wl_seat, though.
> That's not correct. Timestamps are seat specific but timestamps are not
> the same as serials. Timestamps are local to the seat. Serials are
> actually compositor-global in weston and, in order to make things work,
> should probably at least be client-global in other compositors.
I thought serials were intentionally *not* client-global, as we often
compare serials from two different clients. But whether they're seat-global
or compositor-global is something the specification doesn't say. We should
probably clarify that somewhere.
>> Once again, Gregory, Thanks for the explanation. I hope I'm following ok.
>>> --Jason Ekstrand
>>> wayland-devel mailing list
>>> wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the wayland-devel