With support for the old metacity theme format gone, there's no
reason to keep storing theme information in terms of the old theme
properties. Just store the padding/border information for each
element directly.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
MetaFrameStyle now only holds a MetaFrameLayout, so we can cut out
the middle man and use the layout directly. And as we are already
using a single style/layout per frame set and handle frame state
and focus by setting appropriate style flags, MetaFrameStyleSet
is pointless too - just store one MetaFrameLayout per frame type
directly in the theme.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
Rest in peace you magnificent format, love-child of arcane X11 drawing
API and markup craze, you will not be missed.
We do remember however the bravery of a many men and women, who fearlessly
descended into the guts of your intrinsics and turned ugliness into beauty;
their work will still be spoken of when you will long have been forgotten.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
All geometry/drawing information is now picked up from the GTK+ theme,
so replace the remaining bits (hide_buttons + title_scale) with
hardcoded values from the default Adwaita theme and stop loading
the metacity theme altogether.
If there is a need to theme those constants again in the future,
we should make them available from GTK+ where they are available
for client-side decorations as well. They certainly don't justify
maintaining support for a complex theme format.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
Few themes ever had support for those in the first place, and even
less supported them properly; in particular support in the default
theme has been broken for a while now.
With this in mind (and considering that not even the tweak tool exposes
any UI to configure them), let's (try to) remove support altogether - the
corresponding rects are still kept around, so it's easy to add back in
case we reconsider (and get the necessary artwork).
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
GTK+ doesn't deal with different frame types for its client-side
decorations - it just treats dialogs the same as normal windows
and ignores the odder frame types like UTILITY and MENU. That's
fine as those have largely gone out of fashion anyway, but it's a
different case for the WM - we still have to support them somehow.
For now, just apply the existing title_scale factor to the geometry
information picked up from the theme in addition to the title font.
If it turns out that there's demand for something more sophisticated,
we can still consider adding wm-only style information to the GTK+
theme.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
The frame shape is relevant in three places:
- the window decoration we draw
- the frame mask (used for the shape region)
- the frame bounds (used for clipping)
All three should match, so make sure to use the same GTK+ method for
the first two, and bring the (non-antialiased) third closer to the
other two by removing an obscure modifier from the corner radius.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
We now have everything in place to pick up geometry and drawing
information from GTK+ rather than the metacity theme, so do just
that; the metacity theme is now only used for some constants
(title_scale, hide_buttons, ...), which we will replace soon.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
We want to eventually pick up all theme information from GTK+ instead
of our own theme format; to prepare for this, add another helper method
to fill in geometry information from the GTK+ theme.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
GTK+ expresses the window state as style classes and widget state for
client-side decorations. Add a helper method to translate our own frame
state to the corresponding changes to the style context hierarchy.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
Sounds obvious, doesn't it?
After this change when titlebar-uses-system-font is set, the "system
font" used will not be a generic one, but match what GTK+ uses in
client-side decorations.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
In order to pick up all theme information from GTK+, a single style
context is not enough; a style hierarchy that closely matches the widget
hierarchy by GTK+'s client-side decorations will allow this soon.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
Our current use of style contexts is fairly limited - we don't
use them for much more than picking up some color information.
We will soon start to make more elaborate use of GTK style
information, but a single context will no longer be enough
to draw a frame then.
To prepare for this, add a simple ref-counted type to wrap
style information.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
Rather than defining the space to the left and right of buttons, add a
simple spacing property that defines the space between buttons, which is
what GTK+ does for client-side decorations (e.g. GtkButtons in a GtkBox).
Unfortunately the value is hardcoded in GTK+; if it is exposed in the
theme in the future, we should pick it up from there, but for now we
just use the same value as GTK+.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
Basically it's odd to have "button_rect" be a function with all the
foo_rect GdkRectangles around - renaming to get_button_rect() will
free the name for the generically named "rect" once buttons are the
only movable pieces in the frame.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=741917
This reverts commit 47e339b46e. The
approach that was used to reduce the amount of work we do on RR events
to the necessary minimum is flawed. It assumes that, when the first
event we see where the retrieved XRRScreenResources.timestamp is
bigger than the previous, we already have all the data we need to
rebuild our view of the world.
That isn't true however, because the X server sends
RRScreenChangeNotify events for every step of the configuration
change, i.e. it lacks an atomic reconfiguration API. In particular, if
the X screen size is one of the changes, when we rebuild our state and
emit monitors-changed, the X screen size might still be the previous
one and since we stop updating ourselves until another reconfiguration
happens (noticed by looking at XRRScreenResources.timestamp) we end up
with the wrong idea of the X screen size.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=738630
