On 10 May 2011 05:46, Russell Shaw rjs...@netspace.net.au wrote:
On 10/05/11 07:29, Daniel wrote:
El dg 08 de 05 de 2011 a les 09:47 -0700, en/na Bill Spitzak va
escriure:
Though it is possible, I don't like the idea of clients sending hints
about what areas are the close box or window
On 11/05/11 18:55, Michal Suchanek wrote:
On 10 May 2011 05:46, Russell Shawrjs...@netspace.net.au wrote:
On 10/05/11 07:29, Daniel wrote:
El dg 08 de 05 de 2011 a les 09:47 -0700, en/na Bill Spitzak va
escriure:
Though it is possible, I don't like the idea of clients sending hints
about
On 2011-05-11, Michal Suchanek wrote:
Maybe in an ideal world each application would be split
into two (or more) processes, one taking care of the UI
interaction and the other(s) doing the actual work so
that the UI is always responsive.
However, this is not the case and for moves and
If I understand the proposal correctly this shouldn't be a problem. If the
application becomes unresponsive the server has the ability to manage it
(move, resize, raise, lower, possibly hide/show, and an option to kill it)
and it knows if it didn't respond to events.
I do think that there is one
Michal Suchanek wrote:
Moves and resizes implemented in the client can't work well.
Any resize solution that does not allow an atomic on-screen update of a
window to it's new size, with the resized decorations and contents, is
unacceptable. The whole point of Wayland is that the user NEVER
Michal Suchanek wrote:
I guess there is one thing that can be done. The compositor could
publish a hint to the application that it takes care of decorating the
windows (even if it is a tiling WM and in fact does not but the user
does not want any decorations in the first place)
Indeed this
I personally does support and only support client side decoration.
Move and resize ? Better be done in the server side.
Average application should never care about where its windows is. The
compositor cares and move them without notify the client.
If the unusual application does care where its
