Originally posted by smitty3268
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Qt 5.1 To Feature Improved Support For Wayland
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by asdxQt, not QT.
Learn to write please.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View PostIt would be helpful if you pointed him in the right direction, with a link. How will it work?
It's entirely legal (and was proposed on the wayland list) for the compositor (Weston, KWin, etc.) to override the default appearance of the app in that case.
That allows the compositor to stick custom menus, or draw it's own titlebar + buttons on top of the hung app, and the compositor is free to force close, minimize, help drag the window, etc. to it's hearts content.
I don't have a link, but i'm sure you can google to find it if you want.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by smitty3268 View PostPlease do some research. This is just plain false.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Awesomeness View PostClient-side decorations also mean that the application is the only one to decide what happens with a window. So when I load a huge file into an applications and while processing the file the UI becomes unresponsive, I won't even be able to minimize it.
Leave a comment:
-
In other words, if you use an efl application in Unity, it'll integrate poorly. Oh wait, it would anyway.
What it really means, is if you use [insert wayland incompatible toolkit here] in Unity, you'll get a rootless X window which is nested inside the wayland compositor, and will have the same decorations as all of your other windows (the compositor which contains the X window, which is part of the toolkit you're using (GTK, Qt, etc.), will use your current theme for that).
The only thing which may be off would be the color scheme and the actual application feel (because the wayland incompatible toolkit may not utilize the same theme library). That would be, and is, the case now anyway. Hopefully it will be improved in the future, since color schemes can be relatively simple to represent. It'd be up to the toolkits' developers to decide whether it's worth their time, though.
Hopefully, any toolkits which implement the wayland api will also implement this ethereal new theme specification. I've heard it theorized a few times, and I believe it's possible, but I haven't heard any news recently about it. Here's hoping. ^_^
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Awesomeness View PostSo GNOME Shell implemented a usage metaphor that makes minimizing unnecessary. Therefore it's not a completely outlandish assumption that GNOME applications for Wayland will draw a titlebar that won't have a minimize button.
Absolutely NO Xfce, Plasma, Unity, etc. would want to use a GNOME application that cannot be minimized. Unity users wouldn't want to use applications with titlebar buttons on the righthand (i.e. the ?wrong?) side.
Client-side decorations also mean that the application is the only one to decide what happens with a window. So when I load a huge file into an applications and while processing the file the UI becomes unresponsive, I won't even be able to minimize it.
Stupid Wayland takes one of the most useful X11 features away and other projects should fix that? What if they don't? ?Too bad, you?re stuck with Wayland now? or what?
IMO it's evident that Intel develops Wayland for tablets, smartphones and other devices (smart TVs, IVI,?) that don't have windows and that's fine but then Intel should not act if Wayland was for desktops as well.
No one is seriously denying that X accumulated tons of cruft over the decades but attempting to replace it by even throwing X?s good aspects out of the window is absolutely retarded.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post1 app could look the same regardless the DE and toolkit(true for widget and decoration) just drawing directly in any form you like
Absolutely NO Xfce, Plasma, Unity, etc. would want to use a GNOME application that cannot be minimized. Unity users wouldn't want to use applications with titlebar buttons on the righthand (i.e. the ?wrong?) side.
Client-side decorations also mean that the application is the only one to decide what happens with a window. So when I load a huge file into an applications and while processing the file the UI becomes unresponsive, I won't even be able to minimize it.
Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Postif DE enviroments agree in using a common drawing API that interfaces with Wayland protocol(cairo, GL, etc) to draw widgets/decorations
IMO it's evident that Intel develops Wayland for tablets, smartphones and other devices (smart TVs, IVI,?) that don't have windows and that's fine but then Intel should not act if Wayland was for desktops as well.
No one is seriously denying that X accumulated tons of cruft over the decades but attempting to replace it by even throwing X?s good aspects out of the window is absolutely retarded.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Ancurio View PostI think some people here might be misguided in that they think CSD means the toolkits have to draw the decorations.
The way it will most likely turn out to be is that everyone will use some sort of 'libdeco' to do the drawing instead,
actually unifying decorations even across compositors, something that wasn't even possible under X.
That is something I could live with!
Leave a comment:
-
I think some people here might be misguided in that they think CSD means the toolkits have to draw the decorations.
The way it will most likely turn out to be is that everyone will use some sort of 'libdeco' to do the drawing instead,
actually unifying decorations even across compositors, something that wasn't even possible under X.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: