On Sunday, May 15, 2016 10:10:11 PM Valorie Zimmerman wrote: > Reading backlog on channels today, I saw this in #plasma: > > [02:12] <mgraesslin> hmm looks like kmail with qtwebengine is faster > in opening mails, that would be positive > [02:12] <notmart> yay > [02:12] <notmart> but distribution will ever package it now? > [02:13] --> soee ([email protected]) has joined this > channel. [02:13] <bshah> qtwebengine? > [02:15] <notmart> yeah, qtwebengine and in turn anything using it > [02:15] <mgraesslin> well kdepim now depends on it > [02:15] <notmart> like, we haz a "beautiful" mobile web browser > written one year and an half ago... :p > [02:16] <mgraesslin> so distros need to either package it or drop kdepim > [02:18] <notmart> yep > [02:18] <bshah> arch packages it > [02:19] <bshah> but well debian and friends.. meh > [02:19] <mgraesslin> the deb-based distros don't > > I'm assuming that Debian doesn't package it because of policy - > chromium inside of qtwebengine evidently embeds its own dependencies, > which is ... ick. > > I looked it up on the Qt website: > http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtwebengine-index.html > > If KDEPim will now depend on it, we have no choice, I think? Shall I > file a packaging bug against it?
It's not just policy (Debian policy doesn't forbid embedded libraries, it just discourages them). The estimate I recall reading from people on the Debian Qt-KDE team is that packaging QtWebEngine is about the same amout of work as Chromium or Firefox on their own. Take a look at the number of people that work on those (including people doing it as a full time job) and ask yourself how feasible it is. Scott K -- kubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
