Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

KDE's Konqueror Is In Need Of A New Maintainer

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • KDE's Konqueror Is In Need Of A New Maintainer

    Phoronix: KDE's Konqueror Is In Need Of A New Maintainer

    KDE's Konqueror web-browser is in need of a new maintainer and for some love to port it to Qt5 and KDE Frameworks 5...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc2NTA

  • #2
    is this where we finally admit that konquerer has been on life support for the whole of the KDE4 era, and that the lack of a maintainer for the KDE5 era finally means that we move on with our (rekonq/dolphin) lives?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Jedibeeftrix View Post
      is this where we finally admit that konquerer has been on life support for the whole of the KDE4 era, and that the lack of a maintainer for the KDE5 era finally means that we move on with our (rekonq/dolphin) lives?
      Agreed. And konqueror being a dependency of so many distros has been annoying to me. The only reason it ever held my interest is because it wasn't yet-another-firefox-variant but it also acted as a file browser. It acted a lot like Internet Explorer but did a much better job at being a multi-use program. If KDE expects to progress, there are things it has to move on from. The one reason why I dislike KDE over GNOME is because KDE's developers don't appear to have a planned schedule - they seem to just do things as they go along but they don't appear to have a consistent plan. This isn't always a bad thing, because that's why KDE, IMO, has the best features. But it results in it being messy, disorganized, and left with a lot of applications that are half-complete or unmaintained. There are a lot of things in KDE I think need to be put to rest, and I think KF5 is a good place to transition away from these things. If we are to let go of konqueoror, now is the best time.


      I guess you could say Konqueror has been.... konquered

      Comment


      • #4
        This should be ditched. Along with Epiphany. Developer should be focusing on things actually going to be useful for end user. Just because it was in KDE4 or previous, no need for it in KDE5 era. Planned and new eco system should be made for KDE5

        Comment


        • #5
          Konqueror should have been retired from KDE a long time ago. The KHTML rendering engine is just not up to par with today's needs (or maybe it's the other way round, that the websites of today don't need KHTML).

          Anecdotal evidence once again, but Konqueror always had issues with rendering many pages I visit, such as the Yahoo home page or GMail. Back when I was still studying it wasn't even capable of displaying my university's student resource portal correctly. And to top it off, Konqueror always had issues establishing connections to webpages; it would load a page halfway and suddenly error out for no reason while Firefox and Chrome would load it without issues.

          Frameworks 5 would be a good opportunity to finally retire Konqueror; if KDE wants a native Qt web browser, it already has Rekonq.

          Comment


          • #6
            In one lab at our Uni we used Epiphany because the manager did not install Firefox.
            If such projects were not installed as default, we would probably get a proper browser.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
              Konqueror should have been retired from KDE a long time ago. The KHTML rendering engine is just not up to par with today's needs (or maybe it's the other way round, that the websites of today don't need KHTML).
              Welll, just to put this into perspective: Konqueror has also had a WebKit based render engine for many year now.
              As far as I know QtWebKit with necessary KDE integration bits, same as Rekonq.

              Originally posted by Sonadow View Post
              Frameworks 5 would be a good opportunity to finally retire Konqueror
              I wouldn't be surprised if Konqueror isn't one of the applications that are already ported.

              A better opportunity might be the new QtWebEngine and the potential need to add support for that

              Cheers,
              _

              Comment


              • #8
                Gnome's Web runs as good as Firefox do nowadays. It is very well integrated into Gnome with its design principles, has very clean UI and is my main web browser. The only thing that annoys me is there isn't a proper download manager of it and some minor regressions (the most recent was a bug at webkitgtk related to gcc 4.9.0 which is soon fixed by Fedora developers).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tiger_Coder View Post
                  This should be ditched. Along with Epiphany. Developer should be focusing on things actually going to be useful for end user. Just because it was in KDE4 or previous, no need for it in KDE5 era. Planned and new eco system should be made for KDE5
                  Epiphany is being well-maintained and evolving with WebKit2.

                  Konqueror has spent the past 5 years denying WebKit and being garbage.

                  Comparing these two is truly pathetic. Epiphany has corporate sponsorship and development. The WebKit 2 development port for GTK+ is current and GNOME is using its WebKit backend throughout GNOME 3.12+.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Why would anyone want to kill Konqueror is beyond me... I like it much more than Dolphin, and Konqueror has LOTS of features.
                    Please, don't kill it! Konqueror is valuable even from a historical point of view (KHTML...)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Marc Driftmeyer View Post
                      Epiphany is being well-maintained and evolving with WebKit2.

                      Konqueror has spent the past 5 years denying WebKit and being garbage.

                      Comparing these two is truly pathetic. Epiphany has corporate sponsorship and development. The WebKit 2 development port for GTK+ is current and GNOME is using its WebKit backend throughout GNOME 3.12+.
                      Sigh.

                      Folks, you don't even really know what Konqueror really is, and are spending a lot of effort fighting about this or that, none of which really applies.

                      Let's recap:

                      * The KDE application platform contains a component model framework known as KParts. KParts, together with related technologies like KXMLGUI, allow composing applications in interesting ways. For example, KParts is how Dolphin can embed a terminal emulator docker powered by Konsole, how Kontact embeds KMail and KOrganizer, and to provide a first example involving Konqueror, how Konqueror can display PDFs by embedding Okular.

                      * But it goes a little further than that. What Konqueror actually is is essentially a generic shell that loads KParts, which can be shown in various configurations, such as tabs or splits. Such configurations can be saved as profiles, and loaded later. Everything inside a Konqueror viewport is actually a KPart, usually addressed by an URL, and the KPart is chosen by the data type of the URL: A filesystem directory (using Dolphin's KPart as of KDE 4). A website (more on a moment). A PDF (Okular's KPart). A text file (Kate's KPart). Numerous others, and infinitely extensible.

                      * When comes specifically to viewing websites in Konqueror, there's two prominent KParts: The KHTML KPart, and the WebKit KPart (trivia: there used to be a Gecko KPart at one point, long ago). Obviously the WebKit KPart had "corporate sponsorship and development" as well, on multiple levels (the companies contributing to WebKit; the companies contributing to Qt's backend for WebKit; and in fact WebKit KPart development by way of Rekonq development, which was for a time corporate-sponsored as well).

                      * Konqueror is not the only user of these KParts. Apps like KHelpCenter and other use them as well.

                      Continueing to maintain/develop Konqueror is thus somewhat orthogonal to this whole web browser topic, and even file management - except for how the Konqueror shell (that is, say, the menu structure, the toolbar structure, general view management facilities) affects the user experience of either inside Konqueror.

                      Now, all this makes Konqueror a bit of an odd animal. The complexity of its UI is fairly high, and task-specific UIs like Dolphin and Rekonq have overall proven move popular with users, is I think fair to say. On the hand, Konqueror still has its loyal fans. There's nothing quite like it anywhere else, and for some very specific use cases and work flows, it's tremendously powerful. Say, having a split arrangement that allows you to drag files from one split into a viewer in another split, and saving that arrangement as a profile for later reuse. It's advanced, it's niche - but then neither of those are evils per se.
                      Last edited by Sho_; 08-17-2014, 04:09 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have to agree with Sho_.

                        In KDE 3.5.x, I did the vast majority of my work with Konqueror being used as a generic splittable, tabbable, KIO-backed KPart harness.

                        The ability to edit things in KatePart 4.x would have have made that 99% of my work if Konqueror 4.x's army of papercut bugs didn't exist. As is, that's one of the main things that drove me to LXDE when Trinity demonstrated that they lacked the manpower to update the KDE 3.x codebase to follow more modern FreeDesktop integration standards.

                        If I trusted my time-management abilities at all, I'd try my hand at fixing up Konqueror for 5.x and getting used to C++ along the way.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Later konq

                          I am in agreement with the other comments. Ditch Konq. I have been using KDE for years now (recent XFCE convert). Dolphin is my favorite file manager and Filezilla can take care of the rest. Bring Dolphin cross-plat

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            To follow on from what I wrote earlier, keep in mind that it implies Konqueror hasn't actually been a resource drain on anybody. As David writes in his blog post Konqueror-the-actual-application hasn't really seen much change in a long time, and as I tried to explain, the KPart components it loads are essentially all maintained elsewhere. That Konqueror allows one to view directories hasn't been a resource drain on Dolphin, for example, since Konqueror actually uses Dolphin's technology to show directories. Not even the KHTML KPart that has been the point of so much discussion here is actually a part of the Konqueror codebase that's the topic of David's blog post.

                            What I expect to happen is that some of those die-hard fans who rely on Konqueror's unique abilities will come out of the woodworks and keep it working. Those who had no interest in Konqueror lately likely will continue to find it uninteresting. Not much fuss, overall.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Sho_ View Post
                              Sigh...
                              That's... kind of awesome. I never knew that (I just figured it was a web browser/file manager combined). That definitely makes it seem like it could come back as something awesome if somebody actually took the time to bring it up to date (KF5, QT5, updated interface, etc). I know I would definitely try it out at the very least.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X