Again, QupZilla is not KDE software.
Not everything Qt based is KDE software, and not everything from KDE is good enough, they just don't make every type of software, Konqueror is using deprecated component, QtWebkit, nobody can guarantee that QtWebEngine will continue being supported and improved, will Qt deprecate it like QtWebKit? Nobody knows.As for GTK dependencies, they were in the spin before Firefox was added, for some management tools.
I wish Qupzilla developers luck, I thank them for their efforts, but I believe that without supporting extensions (widely used ones, like Chrome extensions), this will not go far, rekonq made me hope, they once stated they will support them, then it all vanished.
I think Fedora KDE spin should aim to be the best OS (it might already be), not just as a showcase of "only" KDE software.
Again, you're making a distinction without a difference. You can wax poetic about semantics... but it doesn't change the facts. Qt and KDE are inextricably linked. Then you go off on trying to prove a negative about support. The same thing can be said about any software product. Firefox may well go the way of Netscape at some point... that means nothing and isn't the point. As I previously mentioned this is about people making choices based on personal preference and then trying to manufacture justifications. It's as simple as that. It's obvious that qupzilla fits better than Firefox or Chromium.
_______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
