A couple of composite fixes from Owen Taylor

[Maarten Maathuis]

On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Owen Taylor <otaylor at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 09:06 -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
>> On Fri, 2008-09-19 at 17:11 +0200, Maarten Maathuis wrote:
>>
>> > Is there a reason why you didn't commit these patches?
>>
>> Owen hasn't tested the second patch yet. Also, it's nice to see if
>> anyone has comments on the patch before they hit master.
>
> I've tested both patches and they work well as far as I can tell.
>
> (Of course, proving that they don't cause obscure problems elsewhere is
> a lot harder than proving that they fix the problems they were designed
> to fix.)
>
> Also, they make sense to me as patches.
>
> I guess I might quibble with the comment in the second one which makes
> it sounds like this has to do with exotic guffaw scrolling manipulations
> or something.
>
>  /* No matter what happened to the parent window bits because of window
>  * and bit gravity, the bits of redirected children are not affected
>  * so no exposures are needed
>  */
>
> ?
>
> - Owen
>
>
>

If keithp wrote that comment, than perhaps he could improve the
comment, because it's not very obvious to me what window gravity does.