Re: Collaboration on standard Wayland protocol extensions

[Martin Peres <martin peres free fr>]

On 28/03/16 23:47, Drew DeVault wrote:
> On 2016-03-28 10:50 PM, Martin Peres wrote:
> > > Client->Server: What features do you support?
> > > Server->Client: These privledged features are available.
> > > Client->Server: I want this feature (nonblocking)
> > > [compositor prompts user to agree]
> > > Server->Client: Yes/no
> > > [compositor enables the use of those protocols for this client]
> > That looks like the bind operation to me. Why do you need a
> > new protocol?
> How do you propose clients would communicate their intentions to
> compositors? I may be misunderstanding.

I was proposing for applications to just bind the interface and see if 
it works or not. But Giulio's proposal makes sense because it could be 
used to both grant and revoke rights on the fly.
> > So, you are OK with being asked *every time* if you accept that VLC
> > is trying to go fullscreen? I most definitely am not :D
> No, the compositor can remember your choice.

So, you would be asking users to click on "I agree" and "remember my 
choice" every time they set up a computer then :D Not nearly as bad, but 
still bad.

> > (following what chrome and firefox are doing is likely a good idea).
> I agree, permission management on Firefox is good.

Right, we should really aim for something similar, UX-wise.