This makes the gnome-control-center keyboard panel aware of these
bindings so that it can warn about conflicting bindings if the
user tries to use one of these bindings for a different action.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=732385
Currently the bindings for {switch,cycle}.* actions are created with the
META_KEY_BINDING_REVERSES flag so that <shift>+binding triggers the
reverse action. However, gnome-control-center does not know about this
kind of implicit bindings, and, for example, cannot warn when the user
tries to setup a conflicting <shift>+xxx binding.
These backward <shift> bindings are being explicitly set in
gsettings-desktop-schemas, so the META_KEY_BINDING_REVERSES annotation
can be removed for them from mutter.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=732385
MetaKeyBinding can be marked as being reversed
(META_KEY_BINDING_IS_REVERSED), but MetaKeyHandlerFunc callbacks
cannot check whether this flag was set or not on the MetaKeyBinding
which triggered the callback.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=732295
The existing workspace management code is quite hairy, with plenty of
logic inline in all of window.c, workspace.c, and screen.c, making it
hard to understand or make changes to, since you might forget to change
several of the other places the code was around.
Rewrite the internal workspace management logic so that it's
centralized and all in window.c. Document the invariants we need to
maintain, and ensure that these invariants are properly kept, with
asserts in various places.
Extensive testing on gnome-shell did not bring up any issues, and this
is a considerable cleanup.
This will be used to replace some of the hooks that are used to call
into window.c, so that the workspace index property is properly kept up
to date.
We can't name the property "index" since it causes conflicts with the
meta_workspace_index method. This should really be called
meta_workspace_get_index, but oh well.
I accidentally broke this in commit a119ea9. The code was considerably
more complicated than it needs to be, so let's replace it with a
g_list_find and nothing more.
Scanning over the hash table of XIDs is a terrible idea. Not only were
we excluding Wayland windows, but we were also looking at alarms and
barriers, too. We were lucky that that only contained GObjects where
our checks would work.
MetaGrabOp is painful and tedious to work with, because it's a
sequential series of values, meaning we have to use a giant unreadable
switch statement to figure out some basic things about the value.
To solve this, modify the encoding for MetaGrabOp and for the specific
window grab operations so that they're a set of bitflags that we can
easily check.
We've long used a switch statement on the grab operation to determine
where events should go. The issue with MetaGrabOp is that it's a mixture
of a few different things, including event routing, state management,
and the behavior to choose during operations.
This leads to poorly defined event routing and hard-to-follow logic,
since it's sometimes unclear what should point where, and our utility
methods for determining grab operations apart can be poorly named.
To fix this, establish the concept of a "event route", which describes
where events should be routed to.
It turns out that Clutter doesn't actually filter NumLock / ScrollLock /
CapsLock from button events due to its terrible event translation code.
Check only the grab mods to check if it's unmodified.
Popups could not set the cursor image, because the cursor tracker would
ignore window cursors if we had a popup active. The correct condition to
check for is already in should_block_wayland. Rename this to the more
sensible name windows_are_interactable, and use it in the cursor tracker.
Since commit 467465c99c we use meta_stage even on x11 which sets
clutter_stage_set_user_resizable to FALSE.
This messes things up because we ought to ignore the properties on the window
but we apperently didn't.
There is no reason why we'd want to manage the stage window.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=734852
Instead of returning a value based on whether or not we handled it, we
have this logic: either we have taken a grab on the window, in which
case we have a grab op and have handled it ourselves, or we did not take
a grab and *need* to replay the event to the window.
Handle this in events.c by checking the grab operation in the same way
that we check the other grab ops.
