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

> *Needs Discussion*
>
> I think that my dislike of this and related branches comes from
> inconsistencies that have crept into the design of Mir.
>
> We started Mir with the intent to have an MVC structure to our system with the
> model being the shared data representation of the system state, the views
> being subsystems like compositor, frontend and input and the controller being
> where the the shell plugs in.
>
> But through a series of pragmatic decisions we've got to a point that is far
> away from there. There are items missing from the "model" we have in scene
> (like the output devices), there are things in the model that belong to the
> controller (like the surface state), there are interactions that bypass the
> controller and update the model (like the frontend creating surfaces on a
> session instead of forwarding the request to the shell).
>
> It sort-of-works but it gets increasingly clunky and I think we can usefully
> rework towards the original intent.
>
> This MP continues in this misguided direction by putting logic and data to
> handle surface state changes into the model (as ManagedSurface). It is like
> saying that because the walls of a building are not sound we'll fit a shelf by
> building a scaffold outside and mount the shelf on a pair of horizontals that
> come through the window.
>
> I think the right approach is to fix the current architecture rather that
> trying to work around it. Clearly that implies we should first agree what
> needs fixing and how.

Discussions have been had and we're working ong fixing the architecture