5 ms·

>applications can continue to do what they’ve done for nearly 30 years and rely on system title bars. This will work everywhere This isn't true, some X11 windo

>applications can continue to do what they’ve done for nearly 30 years and rely on system title bars. This will work everywhere This isn't true, some X11 window managers don't draw any title bars. Anyway this isn't a problem if you link against GTK or libdecor. Yeah it's broken if you're trying to work against the system and do things in the inconsistent way that they were done in X11, so... don't do that?

jchw 5y ago
Does libdecor even support XDG Decoration? If not, no thanks. Sorry, but if you create a brand new problem for us to all deal with I expect you to have a solution too. If it looks or feels non-native on KDE it’s still broken… And telling me all Linux apps they should link against GTK would make me angry if it wasn’t so stupid. P.S. edit: I’d just to like to add: - Please don’t take my harsh tone too personally. I’m not pissed off at people, I am pissed off at their initiatives sometimes though. I don’t really harbor any ill will towards individual developers. I think if you make decisions that impact an ecosystem it’s only natural that strong emotions will emerge. - The main reason why GNOME solutions are not really landing that well is specifically because they are attacking the problem more from GNOME’s philosophical standpoint than from the standpoint of what is best for applications. KDE does not appear to be embodying the CSD initiative, which is actually Good for GNOME users, since KDE apps will likely feel a ton more native in GNOME as a result. Certainly more than GNOME apps do in KDE… but it also means that libdecor is kind of moot, because what we as app developers really want is one solution that gives us fully native basic window borders everywhere. And to do that, we need a solution that starts from the common ground (xdg-decoration) then goes into special cases (GNOME, Weston, etc.)
- BrightGlow 5y ago
  >Does libdecor even support XDG Decoration? It does, that was the first thing added. I wouldn't suggest using xdg-decoration though as it will mostly guarantee that your apps don't match the decorations. >And telling me all Linux apps they should link against GTK would make me angry if it wasn’t so stupid. If you want GTK decorations, then you should link against GTK. Not sure why you would think that's stupid or would make you angry, please elaborate. If you don't want to use compile time linkage then you can use dlopen, that's what libdecor does under the hood. >KDE does not appear to be embodying the CSD initiative This isn't entirely true, some KDE apps have actually started to use client-side decorations. >which is actually Good for GNOME users, since KDE apps will likely feel a ton more native in GNOME as a result I don't think so, KDE apps will never feel native in GNOME as they're built for a different HIG. Using non-matching decorations will actually make it worse because now the application is following two separate and incompatible HIGs. That's a good way to ensure you get conflicting gestures/keybinds, inconsistent theming, and just a general lack of consistency. >what we as app developers really want is one solution that gives us fully native basic window borders everywhere I don't want that when I'm making apps. If I'm making a GTK app then I would expect to get the GTK borders. If I'm making a Qt app then I would expect to get the Qt borders. And so on. >And to do that, we need a solution that starts from the common ground (xdg-decoration) then goes into special cases (GNOME, Weston, etc.) This isn't correct, xdg-decoration is not the common ground. The common ground would be drawing your own decorations because that's the way any Wayland server works by default. Xdg-decoration is an optional extension that even with its presence doesn't guarantee you will get the borders that you want.
  - h_anna_h 5y ago
    > I don't want that when I'm making apps. If I'm making a GTK app then I would expect to get the GTK borders. If I'm making a Qt app then I would expect to get the Qt borders. And so on. Surely the choice should fall on the user. > That's a good way to ensure you get conflicting gestures/keybinds, inconsistent theming, and just a general lack of consistency. Which is why we would like all of these to be configurable. > The common ground would be drawing your own decorations because that's the way any Wayland server works by default What if I, as a user of a tiling wm don't want any decorations? > Xdg-decoration is an optional extension That everything supports it afaik. (except mutter?)
    - BrightGlow 5y ago
      >Surely the choice should fall on the user. It does, the user can choose to use GTK or Qt apps. >Which is why we would like all of these to be configurable. So making it all configurable is just guaranteeing that the app is broken out of the box and needs to have all this stuff set up before it even works correctly. Not exactly a user-friendly way to ship a program. >What if I, as a user of a tiling wm don't want any decorations? You may have to accept that some apps are not built to work in a tiling WM. In my experience, you will have a lot of trouble with some apps for various other reasons too, not just the decorations. >That everything supports it afaik. (except mutter?) I'm confused, you said everything supports it, but then immediately listed something that didn't support it.
      - h_anna_h 5y ago
        > It does, the user can choose to use GTK or Qt apps. That's... not what I meant by it. I find this dangerous as it encourages duplicate work for minor differences. I would rather not have to make both a GTK and a Qt version of my program just so my users can have the ability to do some basic customization. > So making it all configurable is just guaranteeing that the app is broken out of the box Not sure why you think that. You just put the existing choices as the defaults. > You may have to accept that some apps are not built to work in a tiling WM What about my apps then? As a programmer I want my programs to be friendly for both tiling and non-tiling WMs. This by itself excludes gtk as an option for me. As for some apps not built to work in tiling WMs, the changes needed to make them work properly are usually extremely minor. To be honest it feels like the GNOME team is going out of their way to degrade the usability of their apps (and apps using gtk) for tiled WMs. > In my experience, you will have a lot of trouble with some apps for various other reasons too Some apps might have some minor issues that can usually be solved without a lot of effort, but even if they are not they don't usually pose any problem. > I'm confused, you said everything supports it, but then immediately listed something that didn't support it. Yes? Everything except mutter supports it as far as I know. Is there something difficult to understand here? Edit: I heard that Enlightenment does not support it either.

jchw 5y ago

Does libdecor even support XDG Decoration? If not, no thanks. Sorry, but if you create a brand new problem for us to all deal with I expect you to have a solution too. If it looks or feels non-native on KDE it’s still broken… And telling me all Linux apps they should link against GTK would make me angry if it wasn’t so stupid. P.S. edit: I’d just to like to add: - Please don’t take my harsh tone too personally. I’m not pissed off at people, I am pissed off at their initiatives sometimes though. I don’t really harbor any ill will towards individual developers. I think if you make decisions that impact an ecosystem it’s only natural that strong emotions will emerge. - The main reason why GNOME solutions are not really landing that well is specifically because they are attacking the problem more from GNOME’s philosophical standpoint than from the standpoint of what is best for applications. KDE does not appear to be embodying the CSD initiative, which is actually Good for GNOME users, since KDE apps will likely feel a ton more native in GNOME as a result. Certainly more than GNOME apps do in KDE… but it also means that libdecor is kind of moot, because what we as app developers really want is one solution that gives us fully native basic window borders everywhere. And to do that, we need a solution that starts from the common ground (xdg-decoration) then goes into special cases (GNOME, Weston, etc.)

BrightGlow 5y ago
>Does libdecor even support XDG Decoration? It does, that was the first thing added. I wouldn't suggest using xdg-decoration though as it will mostly guarantee that your apps don't match the decorations. >And telling me all Linux apps they should link against GTK would make me angry if it wasn’t so stupid. If you want GTK decorations, then you should link against GTK. Not sure why you would think that's stupid or would make you angry, please elaborate. If you don't want to use compile time linkage then you can use dlopen, that's what libdecor does under the hood. >KDE does not appear to be embodying the CSD initiative This isn't entirely true, some KDE apps have actually started to use client-side decorations. >which is actually Good for GNOME users, since KDE apps will likely feel a ton more native in GNOME as a result I don't think so, KDE apps will never feel native in GNOME as they're built for a different HIG. Using non-matching decorations will actually make it worse because now the application is following two separate and incompatible HIGs. That's a good way to ensure you get conflicting gestures/keybinds, inconsistent theming, and just a general lack of consistency. >what we as app developers really want is one solution that gives us fully native basic window borders everywhere I don't want that when I'm making apps. If I'm making a GTK app then I would expect to get the GTK borders. If I'm making a Qt app then I would expect to get the Qt borders. And so on. >And to do that, we need a solution that starts from the common ground (xdg-decoration) then goes into special cases (GNOME, Weston, etc.) This isn't correct, xdg-decoration is not the common ground. The common ground would be drawing your own decorations because that's the way any Wayland server works by default. Xdg-decoration is an optional extension that even with its presence doesn't guarantee you will get the borders that you want.
- h_anna_h 5y ago
  > I don't want that when I'm making apps. If I'm making a GTK app then I would expect to get the GTK borders. If I'm making a Qt app then I would expect to get the Qt borders. And so on. Surely the choice should fall on the user. > That's a good way to ensure you get conflicting gestures/keybinds, inconsistent theming, and just a general lack of consistency. Which is why we would like all of these to be configurable. > The common ground would be drawing your own decorations because that's the way any Wayland server works by default What if I, as a user of a tiling wm don't want any decorations? > Xdg-decoration is an optional extension That everything supports it afaik. (except mutter?)
  - BrightGlow 5y ago
    >Surely the choice should fall on the user. It does, the user can choose to use GTK or Qt apps. >Which is why we would like all of these to be configurable. So making it all configurable is just guaranteeing that the app is broken out of the box and needs to have all this stuff set up before it even works correctly. Not exactly a user-friendly way to ship a program. >What if I, as a user of a tiling wm don't want any decorations? You may have to accept that some apps are not built to work in a tiling WM. In my experience, you will have a lot of trouble with some apps for various other reasons too, not just the decorations. >That everything supports it afaik. (except mutter?) I'm confused, you said everything supports it, but then immediately listed something that didn't support it.
    - h_anna_h 5y ago
      > It does, the user can choose to use GTK or Qt apps. That's... not what I meant by it. I find this dangerous as it encourages duplicate work for minor differences. I would rather not have to make both a GTK and a Qt version of my program just so my users can have the ability to do some basic customization. > So making it all configurable is just guaranteeing that the app is broken out of the box Not sure why you think that. You just put the existing choices as the defaults. > You may have to accept that some apps are not built to work in a tiling WM What about my apps then? As a programmer I want my programs to be friendly for both tiling and non-tiling WMs. This by itself excludes gtk as an option for me. As for some apps not built to work in tiling WMs, the changes needed to make them work properly are usually extremely minor. To be honest it feels like the GNOME team is going out of their way to degrade the usability of their apps (and apps using gtk) for tiled WMs. > In my experience, you will have a lot of trouble with some apps for various other reasons too Some apps might have some minor issues that can usually be solved without a lot of effort, but even if they are not they don't usually pose any problem. > I'm confused, you said everything supports it, but then immediately listed something that didn't support it. Yes? Everything except mutter supports it as far as I know. Is there something difficult to understand here? Edit: I heard that Enlightenment does not support it either.