Merge lp:~nick-dedekind/qtubuntu/lp1475678.surface-occlude into lp:qtubuntu
| Status: | Merged |
|---|---|
| Approved by: | Daniel d'Andrada on 2015-10-20 |
| Approved revision: | 284 |
| Merged at revision: | 284 |
| Proposed branch: | lp:~nick-dedekind/qtubuntu/lp1475678.surface-occlude |
| Merge into: | lp:qtubuntu |
| Diff against target: |
151 lines (+48/-6) 3 files modified
src/ubuntumirclient/input.cpp (+7/-1) src/ubuntumirclient/window.cpp (+39/-5) src/ubuntumirclient/window.h (+2/-0) |
| To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~nick-dedekind/qtubuntu/lp1475678.surface-occlude |
| Related bugs: |
| Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nick Dedekind (community) | Abstain on 2015-11-06 | ||
| Daniel d'Andrada (community) | 2015-10-05 | Needs Fixing on 2015-11-05 | |
| PS Jenkins bot | continuous-integration | Approve on 2015-10-12 | |
|
Review via email:
|
|||
Commit Message
Support server->client visibility change to stop rendering (lp:#1475678)
Description of the Change
Support server->client visibility change to stop rendering (lp:#1475678)
related MPs:
https:/
https:/
https:/
| Daniel d'Andrada (dandrader) wrote : | # |
In src/ubuntumircl
"""
+ window(
"""
You sure this is necessary?
It doesn't look right that a backend is calling the client-side API. Since, QWindow::visible property is under control of application code, it would be weird that it suddenly turn false without app code having explicitly set it (either via setVisible(false) or hide()).
- 284. By Nick Dedekind on 2015-10-12
-
better exposure handling
| Nick Dedekind (nick-dedekind) wrote : | # |
> In src/ubuntumircl
>
> """
> + window(
> """
>
> You sure this is necessary?
>
> It doesn't look right that a backend is calling the client-side API. Since,
> QWindow::visible property is under control of application code, it would be
> weird that it suddenly turn false without app code having explicitly set it
> (either via setVisible(false) or hide()).
Apparently not. Looks like it's the isExposed that stops the redraw.
I've fixed it up now.
| PS Jenkins bot (ps-jenkins) wrote : | # |
PASSED: Continuous integration, rev:284
http://
Executed test runs:
SUCCESS: http://
deb: http://
Click here to trigger a rebuild:
http://
- 285. By Nick Dedekind on 2015-10-26
-
merge with trunk
- 286. By Nick Dedekind on 2015-11-05
-
Exposure initialization
| Daniel d'Andrada (dandrader) wrote : | # |
something like pendingOcclusion or occlusionCatchup would be clearer than exposeCatchUp as this is meant specifically to occlude the window. Corner cases like this should be well explained.
| Nick Dedekind (nick-dedekind) wrote : | # |
> something like pendingOcclusion or occlusionCatchup would be clearer than
> exposeCatchUp as this is meant specifically to occlude the window. Corner
> cases like this should be well explained.
Done and added a comment explaining.
| Daniel d'Andrada (dandrader) wrote : | # |
Thanks! But looks like it was too late. This last change didn't show up in the merged branch.

PASSED: Continuous integration, rev:283 jenkins. qa.ubuntu. com/job/ qtubuntu- ci/254/ jenkins. qa.ubuntu. com/job/ qtubuntu- wily-armhf- ci/45 jenkins. qa.ubuntu. com/job/ qtubuntu- wily-armhf- ci/45/artifact/ work/output/ *zip*/output. zip
http://
Executed test runs:
SUCCESS: http://
deb: http://
Click here to trigger a rebuild: s-jenkins. ubuntu- ci:8080/ job/qtubuntu- ci/254/ rebuild
http://