[PATCH wayland-protocols v4] unstable: add xdg-toplevel-decoration protocol
sir at cmpwn.com
Fri Apr 13 15:12:16 UTC 2018
On 2018-04-13 4:59 PM, Jonas Ådahl wrote:
> Neither these need the "set_mode" or "preferred_mode" stuff.
I don't think I'm following. I wonder if you have time to write up a
proposed revision to the patch?
> > Clients have an arbitrary surface in which they can render whatever they
> > want, including decorations. Compositors have an arbitrary surface in
> > which they can render whatever they want, including decorations. The
> > protocol acknowledges that after negotiations either party can do
> > whatever they want, but communicates their choice to each other so they
> > can make more educated decisions.
> Not sure what you mean here. The surface is from the client here only,
> and the client has no wiggle room in the proposed protocol, only the
When I spoke of the compositor "surface" I meant like the GBM buffer or
whatever else it's drawing client surfaces on. And the client does have
wiggle room, like I said it can draw whatever it wants.
> > We've talked about similar approaches to other things in wlroots and, at
> > least for our group, the consensus is that we don't generally like
> > changing behaviors simply based on the existence of a resource. We may
> > as well be explicit.
> As the protocol is defined here, the only way for these clients to
> function is to not bind the global though, as otherwise they might be
> force to do something that they cannot.
I think I see where you're getting at in these comments. I'll keep this
in mind for the next revision.
> That's something that can be done too. What I meant, however, was to
> rename the XML file and the directory which it is in. If new window
> types are added etc, their requirements might differ, but making the
> "protocol group" slightly more generic sounding, it'd be more flexible
> for additions in the future.
Gotcha, easy change.
More information about the wayland-devel