Code review comment for lp:~vanvugt/mir/managed-surface

3. I believe all the arguments in favor of this branch are bunk. I'll outline them trying to skip repetitions of the same argument:
3a. "You can't call a_scene_surface->some_method() and accidentally bypass the management policy."

This can be solved by API.

3b * Any surface functionality can be modified by the shell in future this way.

This is a tautology as an absolutism (define a C++ interface which prevents someone from doing something), and bad interface design as an ideal (maximal flexibility = doing nothing).

3c * Any surface metadata can be neatly attached to a surface instance by the shell, without touching the core BasicSurface. e.g. the restore location and soon a lot more like decoration state, minimize location, animation state etc.

This seems to be inventing a problem to justify a design. We all know this can be trivially solved by association.

3d * So I'm much more excited about this one and don't really want to think about the other branch.

I'm very excited about the improved tiling wm branch and don't really want to think about this branch.