[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GtkPlug patch
From: |
Timo Savola |
Subject: |
Re: GtkPlug patch |
Date: |
Tue, 03 Jan 2006 22:29:44 +0200 |
> Question: would this stuff make any difference unless Emacs was called
> in a special way? Is there some protocol advertising the possibility
> for embedding that might be used by window managers or other
> applications to check for embeddability?
Emacs becomes embeddable only if parent-id is passed to a frame. A
normally created frame's window doesn't get the _XEMBED_INFO property.
(This is the "alternate method of beginning the protocol" mentioned in
the "Embedding life cycle" section of the XEmbed spec.)
> If all of this is not the case, then the respective code paths would
> basically just get exercised when one explicitly does something that
> one could not do before. If there are just a few such code spaces,
> the impact on the general release quality would be negligible.
I was thinking that perhaps the functionality could be implemented
internally (emacs-gtkplug.patch, emacs-parent-fix.patch) even if the
command-line interface change (emacs-parentid.patch) is too radical at
this point.
Is modifying the initial-frame-alist using --eval or some other means
possible before the frame is created? Is it possible to use --batch to
bootstrap and run the Emacs main loop? If so, embedders could set the
parent-id manually while the XEmbed functionality is experimental.
> How hard will it be to integrate those patches (or the respective
> functionality) after the release? Would it make sense to integrate
> them already in the multi-tty branch, or should we rather store them
> somewhere separately after the release? Separate branch?
The current patches are quite trivial. I guess a bigger question is:
against which branch should the Xlib/Xt version be implemented?
(A decentralized revision control system would help here.)
> Does this make sense? Or would the authors of this patch prefer to
> try their hand again from a clean head after release?
I prefer to do what's best...
timo
- Re: GtkPlug patch, Jan Djärv, 2006/01/01
- Re: GtkPlug patch, Richard M. Stallman, 2006/01/01
- Re: GtkPlug patch, Jan D., 2006/01/03
- Re: GtkPlug patch, Jan D., 2006/01/04
- Re: GtkPlug patch, Timo Savola, 2006/01/05
- Re: GtkPlug patch, Jan D., 2006/01/05