11:38 <vyivel> what are compositors expected to do with high-resolution discrete scrolling and clients which don't support it?

11:39 <vyivel> specifically, a) clients which support axis_discrete but not axis_value120 and b) clients which support neither

11:40 <vyivel> for a) i presume the compositor should accumulate the high-res events until ±120; until then, no axis events are produced

11:41 <vyivel> what about b)? accumulate as well (but without sending axis_discrete), or send axis as is?

12:28 <zzag> vyivel: a) send axis_discrete

12:28 <zzag> b) neither event

12:29 <zzag> a) yes, the compositor would accumlate v120 delta values until it reaches certain threshold value (+- multiple of 120)

12:39 <vyivel> zzag: i'm interested in "hi-res scrolling + client without axis_discrete support" behavior

12:40 <vyivel> should the compositor accumulate deltas in this case, even if the client doesn't know about discrete scrolling?

12:42 <vyivel> if yes, that feels like artificially lowering precision

12:43 <vyivel> if no, older clients will have better scrolling precision (`axis`) than the clients which support axis_discrete but not axis_value120

12:44 <vyivel> not sure which is better

14:17 <wlb> weston Merge request !331 closed (Minor improvements to screenshot (protocol/client/server))

18:24 <wlb> wayland Issue #307 opened by () [Regression] Rapid LayerSurface updates can crash libwayland in 1.21.0 release https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland/-/issues/307

20:45 <i509VCB> Shouldn't `single-pixel-buffer` be named `wp-single-pixel-buffer` per one of the interface names? Or is the ext/wp/xdg namespace being phased out?

20:45 <i509VCB> *per one of the interface names containing a "wp_" prefix

20:47 <kennylevinsen> i509VCB: it's wp_: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/blob/main/staging/single-pixel-buffer/single-pixel-buffer-v1.xml#L39

20:49 <i509VCB> yes I understand it is wp, I looked at the protocol xml. The confusion I have is that we have "ext-session-lock", "drm-lease", "single-pixel-buffer", "xdg-activation" in staging. Is it intended that the toplevel folders inside "staging" are prefixed with their namespace or is there a rule about the "wp" namespace not needing such a thing?

20:49 <kennylevinsen> It's strictly speaking the interface that has the prefix, not the protocol, but that's the same for viewporter.

20:50 <i509VCB> so session lock is the odd one out regarding naming then?

20:52 <kennylevinsen> So far the trend is that non-wp ones do not have prefix in their protocol name, while all have prefix in their interface name. See stable and unstable folders for more protocol examples.

20:54 <kennylevinsen> so xdg- and ext- ones have their prefix in their protocol name, wp- does not.

20:54 <i509VCB> ah ok

20:54 <i509VCB> I see

20:59 <ifreund> no, there's no good reason for this afaik

21:01 <ifreund> and I don't think the protocol name even matters really, it's not used anywhere in the generated code