On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Olav Vitters <olav@vitters.nl> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 01:10:29PM -0700, Jono Bacon wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Olav Vitters <olav@vitters.nl> wrote:
>>
>> > Primary focus for GNOME will be Wayland. There are a few things that
>> > Wayland does not support that X did support. This will result in having
>> > to do things differently. See e.g. the various forms of 'deprecate' is
>> > mentioned on https://live.gnome.org/Wayland/GTK%2B as well as
>> > https://live.gnome.org/Wayland/Gaps.
>> >
>> >
>> Many thanks for providing some clarity, much appreciated. :-)
>>
>> Quick question: do you think the GNOME project may be interested in
>> exploring Mir as a display server to support. If Thomas is offering to hop
>> on a call or discussion with the KWin folks, I am wondering if GNOME may be
>> interested.
>>
>> I completely understand that your focus is Wayland, but if a member of the
>> GNOME community is interested in exploring building Mir support, I want to
>> ensure we can be as supportive as possible.
>
> When I asked about Mir, a Mir developer made it really clear that Mir is
> just for Unity. Any different or conflicting needs would not be taken
> into account. Meaning: adjust to how Unity does things.
>
Focusing on the technical perspective here: Mir is one component of
the overall Unity stack and Unity consumes it in much the same way it
leverages any other component: Defining an interface clearly
expressing Unity's needs and implementing in terms of Mir. A good
example is application management and focus strategies: Mir offers the
set of currently running applications to Unity, together with a
controller that allows Unity to adjust the focused apps. Unity takes
these components and builds its focus strategy on top. That being
said, Mir caters towards Unity's goals, but always keeping a clear
separation of concerns in mind. With that, I think it would make sense
to explore how GNOME could leverage Mir, too and I'm happy to start
the discussions :)
Apart from Mir and Wayland, the gaps page you were citing has open
points that have been traditionally covered by the X server (for
sometimes no good reason) and they are mostly independent of the
underlying display server technology. Identifying
replacements/approaches to close those gaps without too many
assumptions on the underlying stacks could benefit all DEs. Happy to
have a discussion on that, too.
Thomas
> For Wayland all kind of changes were made and have to be made. I have 0
> idea on how much overlap there is for Mir, but Wayland is more than just
> another render backend. If similar changes are needed for Mir it could
> conflict with Wayland.
>
> Still, if there is someone who wants to support Mir (long term like a
> co-maintainer, not just some patches), I don't see why not. I don't know
> who uses which distribution though, seems easiest to just write to
> relevant mailing lists.
> --
> Regards,
> Olav
>
> --
> ubuntu-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
