Mir Display Server Support Lands In SDL2

[Bestia]

The fact right now is that code is duplicated.
Just compare https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f86...L_waylanddyn.c against https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f86...r/SDL_mirdyn.c
Occasionally here is a line of code missing, there was a line of code added and in the end the Mir back-end has 20 lines of code less in this file than the Wayland back-end but the rest is pretty much a search "WAYLAND" and replace with "MIR". Even the comments are the same:

You've picked the files that are almost identical but the rest have bigger differences. Also there are files in Wayland support (waylandtouch) which don't exist in Mir support and vice versa (mirframebuffer).

Even the file names just had a search&replace done: https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f86.../video/wayland https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f86.../src/video/mir

By that logic the Wayland file names are just search and replace from X11 backend or Haiku or other video backends.

https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f8629bdef2/src/video/x11

https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f8629bdef2/src/video/haiku

[dee.]

Which just goes to show how much unecessary FUD-slinging was involved in Mir/Wayland fiasco. Coding for both is pretty much the same with minor differences and all that matters is having your toolkit like SDL to support it which wouldn't take much additional effort.

Or, it goes to show how unnecessary it was to create Mir in the first place... and how much unnecessary FUD-slinging was involved from Canonical when they announced Mir.

[Ancurio]

Both of them are pretty much just a thin wrapper around the OpenGL layer, aren't they? So most of the code will be GL API calls, with just a little bit tying it to Mir or Wayland?

Replace "GL" with "EGL", and you might almost be right. EGL is used for the most part to setup a GL drawable and context. Other vital things like input and window state management however have nothing to do with EGL/GL, and are obviously different for Wayland/Mir. Although I think both use libxkbcommon for scancode->keysym translation.

[bregma]

Mir support is mostly copy and paste from the Wayland port.

Do you have any evidence at all to support this assertion?

[Ancurio]

The fact right now is that code is duplicated.
Even the file names just had a search&replace done: https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f86.../video/wayland https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/file/52f86.../src/video/mir

Jeesus, the trolling is strong with this thread. I mean, it's not like SDL has a naming convention for their files or something.

[bregma]

The fact right now is that code is duplicated.

So, you decided with intent that the Mir implementation copied the Wayland implementation, and not the other way around.

Perhaps what happened was both new implementations started with one of the other existing implementations? It is, after all, free software where we're encouraged to share and share alike. Condemning one project for being free and condoning the other reveals more about the poster than the projects.

[V10lator]

Well known Linux game porter Ryan Gordon pushed to SDL mainline

This Mir video target for SDL seems to be principally designed by Brandon Schaefer at Canonical.

So Canonical wrote the patch and handled it over to Ryan Gordon to maintain as we all know Canonical wouldn't maintain it for themselves (and as such there would be a high chance that SDL rejects the patches) ? Well done Canonical, well done...

[Bestia]

So Canonical wrote the patch and handled it over to Ryan Gordon to maintain as we all know Canonical wouldn't maintain it for themselves (and as such there would be a high chance that SDL rejects the patches) ? Well done Canonical, well done...

I suppose that you would like to that whoever wrote the Wayland backend would also maintain it as set of patches that are seperate from upstream SDL.

[mrugiero]

So, you decided with intent that the Mir implementation copied the Wayland implementation, and not the other way around.

Well, Wayland support code went public before, so if any of those copies the other, it must be Mir copying Wayland. BUT:

Perhaps what happened was both new implementations started with one of the other existing implementations?

This and being there a common, standard way to handle this things are the most likely situations.

It is, after all, free software where we're encouraged to share and share alike.

Big truth.

Condemning one project for being free and condoning the other reveals more about the poster than the projects.

Nobody is condemning it for being free. Most of the people who criticizes Mir does so because they disagree with the CLA or because they fear it will fragment the desktop, not because it's free software.

So Canonical wrote the patch and handled it over to Ryan Gordon to maintain as we all know Canonical wouldn't maintain it for themselves (and as such there would be a high chance that SDL rejects the patches) ? Well done Canonical, well done...

If Ryan accepted the patches, what makes you think it would be rejected?

[sarmad]

Wayland is ahead of Mir in mobile (Sailfish), and it's ahead of Mir in desktop (Gnome, Enlightenment, etc), and it's also ahead of it in toolkit support. Now the question is: does Mir provide any technical superiority over Wayland? If it doesn't then what's the point behind it?

I am not trolling. I really want to know if there is any technical advantages in Mir.