Unstable protocol name breakage

[Pekka Paalanen]

On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:24:01 +0800
Jonas Ådahl <jadahl at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 05:03:29PM -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:22:45AM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> > > Hi again,
> > > 
> > > I was about to start migrating generic protocols away from weston into
> > > wayland-protocols. The idea was to start with input-method.xml, text.xml,
> > > linux-dmabuf.xml, presentation_timing.xml, scaler.xml and xdg-shell.xml. The
> > > question, however, is what to do with the names, because some names already
> > > have the form "wl_[name]", and renaming such an interface to "zwl_[name]1"
> > > during the unstable period, and then back to "wl_[name]" will cause potential
> > > breakage because some implementations in the wild might expect the "wl_[name]"
> > > to be the original (ancient) version.

> > > Then comes the IVI protocols. I have no opinions about these, and I don't know
> > > what any plan with them might be. Should they be moved, or are they purely a
> > > weston thing?
> > 
> > I thing these belong to kind of a separate category.  I would suggest
> > skipping them as well.  If it makes sense to rename for conformance then
> > the IVI team should probably make that determination and undertake the
> > change on their own discretion.
> 
> Yea, it feels a bit out of scope for wayland-protocols. I could be
> convinced otherwise by the maintainers of the ivi protocols would prefer
> to follow the same procedures.

Hi Tanibata-san,

you might want to say something here about how you intend the
IVI-related protocols to be developed. We can just leave the XML files
in the Weston repository if you do not see any benefit from the
proposed develoment process at this time.

The most important bit is probably the documentation in the github repo
mentioned below. We are setting a way for how to develop and deploy
protocols while allowing breaking changes while the protocol is still
unstable.

The discussion that lead to this started with:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2015-September/024248.html
and continued in October with
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2015-October/thread.html#24764
but I think the most informative email is
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2015-October/024775.html

It points to https://github.com/jadahl/wayland-protocols which I
believe will be moved soon under http://cgit.freedesktop.org/wayland
once there are enough Acks.

My understanding is that ivi-hmi-controller.xml is basically a
Weston-internal protocol, because it is only used to connect
hmi-controller module with the weston-ivi-shell-user-interface helper
client, both of which are more or less toys. This XML file would stay
with Weston in any case.

ivi-application.xml is a more interesting question, since this is
something that third-party applications would be using. Therefore this
XML file would be a possible candidate for the new protocol development
process.


Thanks,
pq
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/attachments/20151104/cd69525c/attachment.sig>