Hi Casey, On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Casey Dahlin <cdah...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:51:07PM -0600, Scott Moreau wrote: >> Yes, there is no reason to fork libwayland. And I don't feel this is a >> true fork, just a temporary rename to avoid the confusion it might >> otherwise cause, remaining under the 'wayland' name. Wayland has been >> in my github repo since I've uploaded it there. The only difference >> now is, the name has been changed and an official fork announcement >> has been made by request. > > ...ok. I'll leave how exactly that's less confusing as an exercise to the > reader. > > Seriously, if you'd just forked Weston and left Wayland alone I'd be on your > side. Even happy. This, however, is just making a political mess. > > --CJD
I'm not sure where the confusion is. Northfield == Wayland but with a few changes to wl_shell_surface interface for minimize/maximize/close stuff. These changes are actually being discussed on the mailing list for possible review and inclusion. Once these basic events/requests go upstream, there will not be a need for northfield as a patched version of wayland. In reality, this is just a project name that !wayland. The need for this custom libwayland is only necessary until the new protocol is pushed upstream at which point, this need should be eliminated. - Scott _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
