Re: mutter plans for 3.22

[Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com>]

Hi;

On 22 March 2016 at 17:51, Sriram Ramkrishna <sri ramkrishna me> wrote:

> > 1) put clutter and cogl in mutter
>
>
>  Is clutter still viable?  I was under the impression that we were going to
> sunset it as it had some limitations?  Are there concerns from folks
> regarding clutter's future?

Clutter as a stand alone library would continue to exist in its
current form, just like Cogl; what Matthias is referring to is putting
a copy of both Cogl and Clutter inside Mutter, so that it can access
the internals of the code instead of using the public API, to avoid
cutting gnome-shell sized holes in the layers in order to do stuff
that only the compositor needs to do.

As for the future of Clutter as a client-side library, this is a topic
for the future GTK hackfest scheduled for June, in Toronto. I'm
currently working (as part of my day job) to finish a rendering scene
graph for GTK that would allow GL-based compositing of the CSS
gadgets, as well as act as the low level API for a generic 2D/3D
canvas API for GTK that would replace Clutter. I plan to blog about it
in about a couple of weeks, when I have a demo.

Ciao,
 Emmanuele.

-- 
https://www.bassi.io
[ ] ebassi [ gmail com]