QtWebEngine Poses Problems For Debian, Distribution Vendors

[Azrael5]

Personally if I was making a 'lightweight system' I'd go for Enlightenment, but that's just because I'm not a fan of LXDE (though the LxQt project is interesting to me). Any particular reason youre avoiding KDE? Kwin and Plasma have been really focusing on cutting memory and CPU usage in the last few releases, if that's the reason.

The problem in object affects Kubuntu!? I'm interested in LXQt implementation too.

[GreatEmerald]

QtWebEngine uses Blink, which is Chrome's multiprocess fork of Webkit, QtWebkit uses Webkit1

Hm, that doesn't make much sense to me. Why have both?

[berolinux]

OpenMandriva likes QtWebEngine...

We at OpenMandriva disagree -- we like QtWebEngine a lot. We're excited about finally having a decently embeddable browser engine with a nice API.
We're not only packaging QtWebEngine, we'll also start using it in our distribution specific tools.

Yes, we'd like it even more if it used system libs instead of bundling its own copies - but not packaging it because of a glitch (one that is fixable too) is the exact kind of overreaction that helps keep Linux off average people's desktops.

Distributions must avoid getting lost in political decisions when they clearly affect the OS quality.

Yes, rules are good. But only as long as you can make exceptions if the benefit from that is big enough.

[LightBit]

Even fat Firefox looks lightweight compared to Chromium.

[tuke81]

Hm, that doesn't make much sense to me. Why have both?

QtWebkit are about to get deprecated.

[Calinou]

I totally agree. Linux systems are a completely failure.

“Linux systems” are not found on desktops in the first place.

[Azrael5]

“Linux systems” are not found on desktops in the first place.

I think problem is strctural: too much teams too much dispersion on work results. Don't like chrome, don't like to adapt programs to linux!? OK no problem. it occurs to make them in your own. How is it possible the same utilities have to be adapted in the several different distros of linux?! User needs more efficiency: to get the program to use the program. So libreoffice: the linux user has to choice considering the ambient in which he operates. This means programs are rigid too much dependant. One of the most simple microsoft program: Paint; cut image drag image resize image: simple quick and effective. little KB. Linux has similar programs much more great as MB but not effective in the same simple operations. Common user search for immediacy and simplicity. so programmers have to think as simple user.

[GreatEmerald]

QtWebkit are about to get deprecated.

Oh... Well, good to know, but if QtWebEngine is really the whole Chromium, then that might very well kill off things like QupZilla and rekonq... Also, QGIS depends on QtWebkit too, I wonder how they'll solve that...

[carewolf]

Oh... Well, good to know, but if QtWebEngine is really the whole Chromium, then that might very well kill off things like QupZilla and rekonq... Also, QGIS depends on QtWebkit too, I wonder how they'll solve that...

Chromium in this context is the not the chromium browser, but the Chromium project and APIs. Opera also uses Chromium. QtWebEngine is not a browser, but an API to write browsers with.

The benefit of wrapping the entire stack is that everything will work exactly like in Chromium. The disadvantage is that it is the entire Chromium stack (plus a heap of patches especially for Linux to make it integrate better than Chrome does).

[berolinux]

Even fat Firefox looks lightweight compared to Chromium.

At least on my box (OpenMandriva Cooker x86_64), QtWebEngine is 68 MB (admittedly quite a bit too large). Firefox is 86 MB.