> On Monday 13 February 2012 23:25:13 Timothy Pearson wrote: > >> > The second commit I pointed out was 9cc1e2c1: I think others already >> > commented >> > in my blog comments why this one is rather bad from a users point of >> view >> > (introducing new config options without removing the obsoleted ones). >> But >> > well >> > the main issue from my point of view is that it modified an enum in a >> > public >> > header by not appending to the end, but in the middle. I think you can >> > imagine >> > what happens to 3rd party offerings compiled against the previous >> version. >> >> We are not too concerned about ABI compatibility here, but since the >> requested change is so trivial I suppose I can push it through. > > This is completely useless and broken patch because all the same > functionality already existed in KDE3 (i.e. the shadows). > And the newly introduced shadows have less functionality than those > existed originally (i.e. they are not displayed when moving a window). > > I suspect this patch was introduced before the final KDE 3.5.10 was > released, when KDE still had no shadow function in kwin. I do agree that if shadow code has been duplicated, the broken code should be removed. I seem to remember KDE 3.5.10 having badly broken shadows, though at this distance I could be mistaken. Actually, with all the repairs I made to kompmgr, and given the inherent bugginess of the non-composited kwin shadow code, I'd like to see the non-composited shadows removed altogether. Non-composited fading has a similar problem IIRC, although I have not tested it as I run kompmgr exclusively on my systems. Tim