Usually the screen is woken up before the shield is deactivated, but
it is also possible to unlock the session programmatically via the
org.gnome.ScreenSaver D-Bus API.
The intention is very likely not to unlock a turned off screen in
that case. Nor does it seem like a good idea to change the lock
state without any indication.
Waking up the screen is more likely to meet expectations and is
more reasonable too, so do that.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/1158
(cherry picked from commit fbe2e30f38)
xgettext gained some support for template strings, and no longer
fails when encountering '/' somewhere between backticks.
Unfortunately its support is still buggy as hell, and it is now
silently dropping translatable strings, yay. I hate making the
code worse, but until xgettext really gets its shit together,
the only viable way forward seems to be to not use template
strings in any files listed in POTFILES.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/1014
With the old screen shield, we were simply hiding the lightboxes to show
the shield when the user became active after activating the shield but
before locking the screen (that is, when using a lock-delay).
However now that the shield is gone, we end up showing the unlock dialog
even though we are not actually locked.
We probably don't want to add back a shield-like mode (that is, a way to
raise the unlock dialog without authentication when we aren't locked),
so just deactivate the whole shield when the user becomes active again
before the lock kicks in.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/2213
There is nothing else to be focused in the lock screen itself -- the
top bar is already handled elsewhere, and the dialog manages itself
now.
Remove the lock screen group from the Ctrl-Alt-Tab manager.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Now that the screen shield is gone (at least, as it used to
be), the corresponding session mode is not necessary anymore
as well.
Remove the 'lock-screen' session mode, and the corresponding
CSS.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Pretty much what the commit title says.
This gives the lock shield actor another role: instead of
being the interactive screen shield, make it the invisible
actor that prevents interacting with windows while the
unlock dialog is sliding down.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Activating a dialog is slightly different from opening it; the
former is about showing the user authentication widgetry, while
the latter is about creating it and pre-allocating the necessary
resources.
Activate the screen shield dialog when necessary.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
The 'onPrimary' argument was being passed to dialog.open(). Turns out,
neither UnlockDialog nor LoginDialog use this parameter.
Remove the unnecessary 'onPrimary' parameter, and cleanup the related
code.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/872
Commit 24e631ffe2 changed the shield animation to use translation
instead of position.
However once the shield is raised, only an animation will lower it
again, which means the shield is missing when it's supposed to be
shown without animation (for example after an idle blank).
Fix this by resetting the translation-y property in that case.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/927
Instead of using the 'y', which queues a full relayout and
thus forces effects to be reapplied, use the 'translation_y'
property, that doesn't force relayouts and allows a future
blur effect to actually use the cached framebuffers a lot more.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/864
Since ES5, trailing commas in arrays and object literals are valid.
We generally haven't used them so far, but they are actually a good
idea, as they make additions and removals in diffs much cleaner.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/805
ES6 allows to omit property names where they match the name of the
assigned variable, which makes code less redunant and thus cleaner.
We will soon enforce that in our eslint rules, so make sure we use
the shorthand wherever possible.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/805
xgettext got better at recognizing template strings, so we can
replace more string concatenations. Alas xgettext is still buggy
(surprise, regular expressions are hard), so there are still a
handful of holdouts that prevent us from making a complete switch.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/792
Every since commit aa394754, StBoxLayout has supported ClutterActor's
expand/align properties in addition to the container-specific child
properties. Given that that's the only container left with a special
child meta, it's time to fully embrace the generic properties (and
eventually remove the child meta).
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/780
Remove the `this.actor = ...` and `this.actor._delegate = this` patterns in most
of classes, by inheriting all the actor container classes.
Uses interfaces when needed for making sure that multiple classes will implement
some required methods or to avoid redefining the same code multiple times.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/559
When the screen is marked as idle, we normally start a fading animation and
a timeout to finally lock the screen. This timeout is configured using the
fade time if no longer delay is set in settings.
However if animations are disabled or slowed-down/up, the fade time is
different from the STANDARD_FADE_TIME and so we might end up showing the
lock shield without actually locking for STANDARD_FADE_TIME in the disabled
or slowed-up animations case, or locking too early in case of slowed-down
animations.
So, just adjust the timeout time using the same logic of animations so that
this value is matching all the times.
Related to https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/1744https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/749
We are currently inconsistent whether to put the operators in front
of the corresponding line or at the end of the preceding one. The
most dominant style for now is to put condition and first branch on
the same line, and then align the second branch:
let foo = condition ? fooValue
: notFooValue;
Unfortunately that's a style that eslint doesn't support, so to account
for it, our legacy configuration currently plainly ignores all indentation
in conditionals.
In order to drop that exception and not let messed up indentation slip
through, change all ternary operators to the non-legacy style.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/725
We currently use no less than three different ways of indenting
object literals:
let obj1 = {
foo: 42,
bar: 23,
};
let obj2 = { foo: 42,
bar: 23 };
let obj3 = { foo: 42,
bar: 23
};
The first is the one we want to use everywhere eventually, while the
second is the most commonly used "legacy" style.
It is the third one that is most problematic, as it throws off eslint
fairly badly: It violates both the rule to have consistent line breaks
in braces as well as the indentation style of both regular and legacy
configurations.
Fortunately the third style was mostly used for tween parameters, so
is quite rare after the Tweener purge. Get rid of the remaining ones
to cut down on pre-existing eslint errors.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/716
