From maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com  Fri Mar 17 11:36:11 2023
From: maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com (Maxim Kartashev)
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 15:36:11 +0400
Subject: Taking screenshots with a command-line tool
Message-ID: <CAG0Tb0ga4tjzP4tke3h=bw=OES9CrRpDQB=mYXpNaW3fhnaXVA@mail.gmail.com>

Does anyone know if there's a command-line for taking
screenshots/screencasts that works under Gnome 42+? A thing like that would
be immensely useful for analyzing automated test failures.

Thanks in advance,
Maxim.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230317/d5317441/attachment.htm>

From ndegraef at redhat.com  Fri Mar 17 12:01:18 2023
From: ndegraef at redhat.com (Niels De Graef)
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 13:01:18 +0100
Subject: Taking screenshots with a command-line tool
In-Reply-To: <CAG0Tb0ga4tjzP4tke3h=bw=OES9CrRpDQB=mYXpNaW3fhnaXVA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0ga4tjzP4tke3h=bw=OES9CrRpDQB=mYXpNaW3fhnaXVA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACeGJU=yQvBNCNQaiWAvQ_n-Ba6CT11Y-WspFZcM1o13YCL==Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Maxim,

Taken from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/72216896/how-can-i-get-a-screenshot-on-wayland-with-pure-python

```
import dbus
from gi.repository import GLib
import dbus.mainloop.glib


def response_handler(response, result):
    if response == 0:
        print(f'Screenshot file: {result.get("uri")}')
    else:
        print("Failed to get screenshot")


def main():
    dbus.mainloop.glib.DBusGMainLoop(set_as_default=True)
    bus = dbus.SessionBus()
    my_name = bus.get_connection().get_unique_name()[1:].replace(".", "_")
    response_path =
f"/org/freedesktop/portal/desktop/request/{my_name}/my_token"
    bus.add_signal_receiver(
        response_handler,
        dbus_interface="org.freedesktop.portal.Request",
        path=response_path,
    )

    desktop = bus.get_object("org.freedesktop.portal.Desktop",
"/org/freedesktop/portal/desktop")
    desktop.Screenshot("Screenshot", {"handle_token": "my_token"},
dbus_interface="org.freedesktop.portal.Screenshot")
    loop = GLib.MainLoop()
    loop.run()


if __name__ == "__main__":
    main()
```

-- Niels

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:36?PM Maxim Kartashev
<maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com> wrote:
>
> Does anyone know if there's a command-line for taking screenshots/screencasts that works under Gnome 42+? A thing like that would be immensely useful for analyzing automated test failures.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Maxim.
>


From maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com  Mon Mar 20 05:13:54 2023
From: maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com (Maxim Kartashev)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 09:13:54 +0400
Subject: Taking screenshots with a command-line tool
In-Reply-To: <CACeGJU=yQvBNCNQaiWAvQ_n-Ba6CT11Y-WspFZcM1o13YCL==Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0ga4tjzP4tke3h=bw=OES9CrRpDQB=mYXpNaW3fhnaXVA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACeGJU=yQvBNCNQaiWAvQ_n-Ba6CT11Y-WspFZcM1o13YCL==Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAG0Tb0jj9QCX2Zw_jES0h1gFZ7vNiK3uobEyp1MxLCNJjoh+2Q@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you, Niels!

It also turns out that gnome-screenshot(1) works fine in the Wayland
environment despite controversial help text that asks for an optional X
display.

On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 4:01?PM Niels De Graef <ndegraef at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi Maxim,
>
> Taken from
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/72216896/how-can-i-get-a-screenshot-on-wayland-with-pure-python
>
> ```
> import dbus
> from gi.repository import GLib
> import dbus.mainloop.glib
>
>
> def response_handler(response, result):
>     if response == 0:
>         print(f'Screenshot file: {result.get("uri")}')
>     else:
>         print("Failed to get screenshot")
>
>
> def main():
>     dbus.mainloop.glib.DBusGMainLoop(set_as_default=True)
>     bus = dbus.SessionBus()
>     my_name = bus.get_connection().get_unique_name()[1:].replace(".", "_")
>     response_path =
> f"/org/freedesktop/portal/desktop/request/{my_name}/my_token"
>     bus.add_signal_receiver(
>         response_handler,
>         dbus_interface="org.freedesktop.portal.Request",
>         path=response_path,
>     )
>
>     desktop = bus.get_object("org.freedesktop.portal.Desktop",
> "/org/freedesktop/portal/desktop")
>     desktop.Screenshot("Screenshot", {"handle_token": "my_token"},
> dbus_interface="org.freedesktop.portal.Screenshot")
>     loop = GLib.MainLoop()
>     loop.run()
>
>
> if __name__ == "__main__":
>     main()
> ```
>
> -- Niels
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 12:36?PM Maxim Kartashev
> <maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know if there's a command-line for taking
> screenshots/screencasts that works under Gnome 42+? A thing like that would
> be immensely useful for analyzing automated test failures.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Maxim.
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/4062605b/attachment-0001.htm>

From maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com  Mon Mar 20 08:18:53 2023
From: maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com (Maxim Kartashev)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 12:18:53 +0400
Subject: pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK
Message-ID: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>

To whom it may concern:
In a week or so we would like to rebase the Wakefield project development
branch (pure_wl_toolkit, [1]) on top of OpenJDK 21 and clean up
Wakefield-related commits history. That will be a breaking change in the
sense that you won't be able to simply fast-forward your changes on top of
pure_wl_toolkit after that and will have to do a manual merge.

If this action somehow affects your work, please reply to this email so we
can work out a solution.

Thank you,

Maxim.

[1] https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/2779150e/attachment.htm>

From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com  Mon Mar 20 12:54:25 2023
From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 05:54:25 -0700
Subject: pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK
In-Reply-To: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f411f883-dd13-5d69-f512-a44bc292c391@oracle.com>

Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge 
from jdk:master rather than a rebase.

-- Kevin


On 3/20/2023 1:18 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
> To whom it may concern:
> In a week or so we would like to rebase the Wakefield project 
> development branch (pure_wl_toolkit, [1]) on top of OpenJDK 21 and 
> clean up Wakefield-related commits history. That will be a breaking 
> change in the sense that you won't be able to simply fast-forward your 
> changes on top of pure_wl_toolkit after that and will have to do a 
> manual merge.
>
> If this action somehow affects your work, please reply to this email 
> so we can work out a solution.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Maxim.
>
> [1] https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit


From maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com  Mon Mar 20 13:07:57 2023
From: maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com (Maxim Kartashev)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 17:07:57 +0400
Subject: pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK
In-Reply-To: <f411f883-dd13-5d69-f512-a44bc292c391@oracle.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f411f883-dd13-5d69-f512-a44bc292c391@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CAG0Tb0iHFJGCVmXoCgqScKpeJAT0eE45SXrqvKqw-JtJhcTVKA@mail.gmail.com>

> Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
from jdk:master rather than a rebase.

That's understandable in general, but in this particular case we would like
to
- rebase on top of OpenJDK 21, not master,
- rewrite older commits as those turned out to be too rough for
publication, which somewhat nullifies the benefits of merge vs rebase.

Neither of those things is absolutely necessary. We can also have another
branch for active development and leave pure_wl_toolkit for periodic
synchronization, which, judging from experience, will significantly lag.

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 4:54?PM Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
> from jdk:master rather than a rebase.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 3/20/2023 1:18 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
> > To whom it may concern:
> > In a week or so we would like to rebase the Wakefield project
> > development branch (pure_wl_toolkit, [1]) on top of OpenJDK 21 and
> > clean up Wakefield-related commits history. That will be a breaking
> > change in the sense that you won't be able to simply fast-forward your
> > changes on top of pure_wl_toolkit after that and will have to do a
> > manual merge.
> >
> > If this action somehow affects your work, please reply to this email
> > so we can work out a solution.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Maxim.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/bbbb9677/attachment.htm>

From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com  Mon Mar 20 13:11:24 2023
From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 06:11:24 -0700
Subject: [External] : Re: pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK
In-Reply-To: <CAG0Tb0iHFJGCVmXoCgqScKpeJAT0eE45SXrqvKqw-JtJhcTVKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f411f883-dd13-5d69-f512-a44bc292c391@oracle.com>
 <CAG0Tb0iHFJGCVmXoCgqScKpeJAT0eE45SXrqvKqw-JtJhcTVKA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c8aa78fe-4d1c-32e8-e4cb-aae4d58f9f0f@oracle.com>

jdk:master /is/ JDK 21, so I don't understand what you mean.

-- Kevin


On 3/20/2023 6:07 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
> > Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
> from jdk:master rather than a rebase.
>
> That's understandable in general, but in this particular case we would 
> like to
> - rebase on top of OpenJDK 21, not master,
> - rewrite older commits as those turned out to be too rough for 
> publication, which somewhat nullifies the benefits of merge vs rebase.
>
> Neither of those things is absolutely necessary. We can also have 
> another branch for active development and leave pure_wl_toolkit for 
> periodic synchronization, which, judging from experience, will 
> significantly lag.
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 4:54?PM Kevin Rushforth 
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>     Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
>     from jdk:master rather than a rebase.
>
>     -- Kevin
>
>
>     On 3/20/2023 1:18 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
>     > To whom it may concern:
>     > In a week or so we would like to rebase the Wakefield project
>     > development branch (pure_wl_toolkit, [1]) on top of OpenJDK 21 and
>     > clean up Wakefield-related commits history. That will be a breaking
>     > change in the sense that you won't be able to simply
>     fast-forward your
>     > changes on top of pure_wl_toolkit after that and will have to do a
>     > manual merge.
>     >
>     > If this action somehow affects your work, please reply to this
>     email
>     > so we can work out a solution.
>     >
>     > Thank you,
>     >
>     > Maxim.
>     >
>     > [1] https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit
>     <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PXAvbjuMXhgerh2lrjOlx15tVWzB8jTeZFd3eCksrFTJdeUz87a3wqNP3xEOpOlP3zhl2pyASmSRXVV0xI1XYnjE5kDib6uqZA$>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/43449999/attachment-0001.htm>

From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com  Mon Mar 20 13:16:59 2023
From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 06:16:59 -0700
Subject: [External] : Re: pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK
In-Reply-To: <c8aa78fe-4d1c-32e8-e4cb-aae4d58f9f0f@oracle.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f411f883-dd13-5d69-f512-a44bc292c391@oracle.com>
 <CAG0Tb0iHFJGCVmXoCgqScKpeJAT0eE45SXrqvKqw-JtJhcTVKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <c8aa78fe-4d1c-32e8-e4cb-aae4d58f9f0f@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <4db16332-bea4-13e3-4479-98041ec40fb2@oracle.com>


 > - rewrite older commits as those turned out to be too rough for 
publication, which somewhat nullifies the benefits of merge vs rebase.

Unless you plan to also squash old commits into a single one, I don't 
get what you are saying here. And if you do plan to squash it, then you 
are losing history, which for a shared branch like this doesn't seem 
like a good idea. If you really do want to start with a clean history, 
then you might at least consider keeping a backup branch with the 
existing commits.

-- Kevin


On 3/20/2023 6:11 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
> jdk:master /is/ JDK 21, so I don't understand what you mean.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 3/20/2023 6:07 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
>> > Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
>> from jdk:master rather than a rebase.
>>
>> That's understandable in general, but in this particular case we 
>> would like to
>> - rebase on top of OpenJDK 21, not master,
>> - rewrite older commits as those turned out to be too rough for 
>> publication, which somewhat nullifies the benefits of merge vs rebase.
>>
>> Neither of those things is absolutely necessary. We can also have 
>> another branch for active development and leave pure_wl_toolkit for 
>> periodic synchronization, which, judging from experience, will 
>> significantly lag.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 4:54?PM Kevin Rushforth 
>> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>     Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a
>>     merge
>>     from jdk:master rather than a rebase.
>>
>>     -- Kevin
>>
>>
>>     On 3/20/2023 1:18 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
>>     > To whom it may concern:
>>     > In a week or so we would like to rebase the Wakefield project
>>     > development branch (pure_wl_toolkit, [1]) on top of OpenJDK 21 and
>>     > clean up Wakefield-related commits history. That will be a
>>     breaking
>>     > change in the sense that you won't be able to simply
>>     fast-forward your
>>     > changes on top of pure_wl_toolkit after that and will have to do a
>>     > manual merge.
>>     >
>>     > If this action somehow affects your work, please reply to this
>>     email
>>     > so we can work out a solution.
>>     >
>>     > Thank you,
>>     >
>>     > Maxim.
>>     >
>>     > [1] https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit
>>     <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!PXAvbjuMXhgerh2lrjOlx15tVWzB8jTeZFd3eCksrFTJdeUz87a3wqNP3xEOpOlP3zhl2pyASmSRXVV0xI1XYnjE5kDib6uqZA$>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/23df96e8/attachment.htm>

From maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com  Mon Mar 20 13:21:12 2023
From: maxim.kartashev at jetbrains.com (Maxim Kartashev)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 17:21:12 +0400
Subject: [External] : Re: pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK
In-Reply-To: <4db16332-bea4-13e3-4479-98041ec40fb2@oracle.com>
References: <CAG0Tb0iKVq52kSZuMa6x2ziHr2wNZRpp4TxW5Ge8HyTx5DzKZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f411f883-dd13-5d69-f512-a44bc292c391@oracle.com>
 <CAG0Tb0iHFJGCVmXoCgqScKpeJAT0eE45SXrqvKqw-JtJhcTVKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <c8aa78fe-4d1c-32e8-e4cb-aae4d58f9f0f@oracle.com>
 <4db16332-bea4-13e3-4479-98041ec40fb2@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CAG0Tb0hUX_L8nnWR4VS0LTTVs7iBc7x=L_8LbpBoMRP-MryaHQ@mail.gmail.com>

>
> Unless you plan to also squash old commits into a single one, I don't get
> what you are saying here. And if you do plan to squash it, then you are
> losing history, which for a shared branch like this doesn't seem like a
> good idea. If you really do want to start with a clean history, then you
> might at least consider keeping a backup branch with the existing commits.
>

Like I said, we understand that re-writing history on a public branch is
generally a bad idea. In this case, it feels like very few people checked
this branch out and certainly none from outside this group have
contributed. So if this group does not object to rewriting history, I don't
see what the problem is.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/5f8d5477/attachment.htm>