xdg_surface initial configuration

[Daniel Stone]

Hi,

On 3 November 2015 at 20:24, Bill Spitzak <spitzak at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking now that this is occurring often enough that it would be
> cleaner to build such commits in at a low-level into wayland. Rather than
> the commit message on wl_surface, and the new "axis finished" events being
> sent the other way, there is a single request and event on wl_display, that
> indicate a break between atomic blocks of changes (also quite a few requests
> and events, such as the sync and ping/pong would imply breaks). This would
> avoid adding these extra events/requests to all the api's, and also free the
> clients and compositors from having to deal with "intersecting" blocks where
> events that require commit-type-A are mixed in with events requiring
> commit-type-B.

It's not a bad idea, but given that interfaces can be controlled in
separate groups by separate modules, it can't be display-global.

The usual way we formalise something like this is by creating a new
object which represents the transaction; see the dmabuf protocol for
an example of this. Mind you, it doesn't actually apply to this case,
since it doesn't give you anything at all for cross-client
synchronisation.

Cheers,
Daniel