Are these patchsets ready to land?

[Bryce Harrington]

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:05:03AM +0800, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 04:56:34PM -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> > There's a few patchsets in patchwork which I'm not entirely certain
> > where they're at review-wise.
> > 
> > Since we're at the start of a new release I'd like to clear down our
> > queue a bit by landing stuff that's ready to go, but while many of these
> > have received some review I'm not 100% if they've completely good to go.
> > 
> > 
> > == Weston ==
> > 
> > 1.  Pointer locking and confinement [v4] (19 patches) - Jonas Adahl
> > 
> > Most of the patches in this patchset have either an R-b or A-b.  I know
> > this is really close to ready to go and almost went in for the release.
> > Is there any remaining questions or work that needs sorted out?  If not
> > should we go ahead and get it landed so we can get going on testing it?
> 
> Should be, soon. There are a couple of patches that has issues (clickdot
> -> confinement demo splitup most notebly). It also needs to be updated
> to the latest protocol changes.

Alright.  In this case I'll set these as 'Changes Requested' in
patchwork to remove them as landing candidates and you can post a v5
with those changes when ready.

> > 2.  Pointer gesture support [v3] (3 patches) - Carlos Garnacho
> > 
> > These add a swipe/pinch protocol and implements demonstrative support in
> > a couple weston clients.  The protocol has R-b's from Jonas and Peter,
> > and looks like from the discussion that only reason they haven't landed
> > was because last time they were looked at we were in the midst of a
> > release.  Unless anyone has any new concerns I'd like to go ahead and
> > land these soon.
> 
> AFAICS the gesture patches are against the moved and renamed protocol
> (_wl_pointer_gestures vs zwp_pointer_gestures_v1) so they need to be
> updated.

Ok sounds good, I'll give carlos a ping.

> > 3.  Tablet support [v2] (13 patches) - Peter Hutterer
> > 
> > This set is relatively recent, but IMHO is unlikely to be terribly
> > controversial.  I am personally not terribly worried it carries much
> > risk, and if there's issues we have plenty of time to test.  How much
> > further time do we think this patchset needs to percolate?  Is this on
> > anyone's todo list to review?
> 
> The tablet protocol is not merged, and these patches might change if the
> protocol changes again before merging.
>
> > == Wayland Protocols ==
> > 
> > 1. Add the tablet protocol [v4] - Peter
> > 
> > I assume this goes with the tablet support for weston.  The charter for
> > wayland-protocols is give a home to unstable stuff once it's gotten a
> > little review.  The tablet protocol seems to fit this bill so while it
> > doesn't look like it has any R-b's, in the interest in moving things
> > forward here I'd like to go ahead and land this, if no one has qualms?
> 
> I discussed this with Peter when he sent the patches and we concluded to
> wait for the R-B's before pushing. It previously had R-B's by a few (I
> think Jason Gerecke, Daniel Stone and Carlos Garnacho at least) and it
> would be good if at least some them could re-give their R-B's before
> pushing.

Fair enough, I'll leave this as is in patchwork while we await word.

> > 2. Various xdg-shell patches
> > 
> > xdg-shell: Add startup notification - Carlos
> 
> This was only a RFC.

Okay.  I've marked this one as RFC in patchwork.
 
> > xdg-shell: Introduce xdg_tooltip - Jonas
> > xdg-shell: Turn xdg_surface into a generic base interface - Jonas
> > xdg-shell: Make get_popup take a xdg_surface instead of wl_surface - Jonas
> > xdg-shell: Bump unstable version to 6 - Jonas
> 
> All of these should only go to the xdg shell v6 branch until we are
> happy with v6. As mentioned in another mail we should really avoid any
> unnecessary breaking changes related to xdg-shell since the impact of
> such changes are severe. FWIW, the ones not on the v6 branch is not
> ready to be merged there either since all of them has outstanding
> issues.
> 
> The xdg-shell v6 patches are also mostly an effort by me and Mike, and
> third party review would be nice. Note that xdg_tooltip patch will
> probably change greatly.

Alright, so these should stay in patchwork for now.  I think we might be
light on reviewers though.

> > Obviously Jonas can land these himself at will, so mostly I'm wondering
> > why they haven't landed yet.  Do they need additional review?
> 
> As I see it, none of these are ready to be merged right now, but some
> are quite close.

Thanks for the feedback.
Bryce

> Jonas
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Bryce
> > _______________________________________________
> > wayland-devel mailing list
> > wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel