Where should project Weston go?

[Marek Chalupa]

On 5 January 2015 at 16:37, Eoff, Ullysses A <ullysses.a.eoff at intel.com>
wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wayland-devel [mailto:wayland-devel-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org]
> On Behalf Of Pekka Paalanen
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 8:32 AM
> > To: wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> > Cc: Samuele Disegna; Bryce Harrington; Jason Ekstrand
> > Subject: Re: Where should project Weston go?
> >
> > > > The other option is to get weston's head and heart aligned, and
> > > > strengthen our focus on being "just" a test bed for improving the
> > > > Wayland protocol.  Give our community's primary attention not to
> > > > Weston's users but Wayland's users - Enlightenment, GNOME, KDE, and
> > > > other DEs.  Survey and study their requirements and look for things
> > > > they need across the board.  And make it easier for them to bring
> > > > us their problems/ideas/needs.  Make it convenient for people to do
> > > > prototyping and experimentation in Weston first, and then port to
> > > > production compositors, rather than vice versa.  Instead of unit
> > > > testing weston, improve the validation testing of wayland, such
> > > > that the same testsuite would run against the weston compositor,
> > > > enlightenment compositor, et al to verify that the DEs have
> > > > properly implemented the protocol requirements.  Instead of
> > > > delivering a monolithic Weston package, turn the best bits of it
> > > > into specialized libraries that DEs can use too (if they wish).
> > > > Define a clear process for 3rd parties to contribute extensions,
> > > > libraries, and driver support changes.  Finally, work to change
> > > > public perception to stop the expectations on producing
> > > > Weston-the-desktop, by vocally championing DEs that are already
> > > > giving solid Wayland-based desktops.
> >
> > Yes. I'm guilty of pretty much ignoring Wayland-fits. Maybe we should
> > look in that direction for testing?
> >
>
> Yep, Wayland-fits was designed with the intention of testing multiple
> Wayland compositor implementations.  It currently only supports the
> Weston compositor atm.  In addition, there are several "generic" (or
> core, if you will) protocol tests and quite a few EFL/Elementary-based
> tests.  Adding support for additional Wayland compositors should be
> relatively easy, though.
>

Yep, it is not hard. Some time ago I wrote plugin for mutter that
implements wayland-fits protocol (
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=730179). I needed to write it as
a plugin for mutter instead of extension in wayland-fits, because mutter
does not export all what is needed for that. Anyway, it worked - but it has
been a while, so I don't know if it is still mergable (and working).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20150109/8273072a/attachment.html>