Ben Rosser wrote:
> I don't recall reading many testimonies from people in these threads who
> actually regularly use Konqueror as their primary browser.
I do.
> If the KDE project did not have a browser, would those who are against
> shipping any non-native KDE applications be against including an external
> browser?
If there were no KDE browser at all, we'd have no other choice. But a KDE
browser exists and should be shipped.
But even if there were no KDE browser at all, I'd be looking into Qt
browsers (Qupzilla, Arora, etc.) before considering a GTK+/XUL one like
Firefox.
> If a browser existed, but it was a "bad" browser (think, say, IE6 or worse
> when it comes to standards support), would it need to be our default and
> *only* browser (in the image) by the same rationale?
If there were no other KDE alternative, we'd ship what is there. But as you
wrote:
> As it happens, Konqueror is neither of these things, which is why I don't
> have a strong opinion on this either way.
thankfully, Konqueror is not THAT obsolete. Even KHTML supports things IE6
did not support, KWebKitPart is a lot more up to date.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
kde mailing list
kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde
New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
