[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [xougen] Re: [Xouvert-general] Server Side Widgets

From: >> G-LiTe /
Subject: Re: [xougen] Re: [Xouvert-general] Server Side Widgets
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 14:12:11 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030818 Thunderbird/0.2a

address@hidden wrote:

well, dont hang up on the mouse example. what i want is to put the whole widget handling stuff (at least for the basic widgets) into the server, so it saves much bandwidth. even for local clients it
will save quite much, since they still have to talk to the server
to write evry little piece of the widgets. an window manager on server side would also be nice.
No offense, but did you think about what exactly has to be done to get there? It'd involve a major rewrite of gtk/qt libraries that may not even make them backwards compatible with older X servers (or you're just going to increase their code size). You'd still have to transfer each theme to the server, though granted the bandwidth overal will decrease. This'd also involve sharing alot of code between libaries such as gtk and qt which are, as far as I know, fundamentally different. Even if they find a way to agree with eachother I wonder if the themes'll be compatible afterwards. Either way my point is this is not _just_ an X thing and it'd require enormous rewrites in some of the toolkit's code. The only way to do this is to write a good standard for it that'll suit all of the larger toolkits and get them to cooperate.

The window manager idea can go straight to the garbage can in my opinion. It just removes the freedom of choice that made linux what it is today. Sure there are people who use it and others who don't. But it simply has to work for _everyone_. Almost all of these graphical applications depend on the X server and the X server needs to work for all of these applications. Surely you can write it as an extension, and maybe that is possible for the toolkits to do themselves once there's some better modularity in Xouvert. But right now, writing an extension for this is, in my opinion, not really Xouvert's concern.

If you want something like this, my advice is to help make X more modular and then allow the toolkits to write it themselves as I mentioned before. By more modular I mean being able to compile extensions without needing part of Xouvert's sources. As far as I know this really just involves a couple of headers. Feel free to correct me on anything I've written in here.

> G-LiTe /

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]