> For general consensus I mean you, me, pano, ivan, lindsay... others?? > Now we are 2 vs 0 :) > Plus hearing some opinions from kde-usability staff. I'm interested in > their ideas about rekonq :)
3 vs 0 with Ivan. > I didn't understand this. If we stop two or three weeks development in > master branch (continuing that on multitask one), stabilizing code and > releasing a full KDE support rekonq, what's the problem? WebkitKDE is a > library, rekonq is an app. They are surely different. And have surely > different targets. Perhaps things go smooths and we can release a > "multitask 0.3 rekonq", perhaps not. And we have to work a bit more on it. > That's all! Ok. > No, sorry. QWebView is a window. QWebView is a QWidget: http://doc.trolltech.com/4.5/qwebview.html > And in my first idea about (again, I can > be wrong) the tabwidget is in the rekonq main application. the tabs (so, > the WebViews) will become separate apps. Yes it is like that. I don't say we must keep tabwidget in the rekonq_tab process. I say that it is easier to duplicate something compiling and remove after. > Yes, I was saying just I'm not used to work with dbus.. idem :)
_______________________________________________ rekonq mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/rekonq
