Re: What happened to rekonq?

[Rainer Dorsch <ml@bokomoko.de>]

On Monday 02 December 2013 21:33:50 Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2013-12-02, Martin Steigerwald <Martin@lichtvoll.de> wrote:
> > What is the oppinion of the Debian Qt/KDE team on this?
> 
> I don't think the Debian Qt/KDE team has a opinion. Debian Qt/KDE team
> maintains QtWebkit, and the kpart-webkit besides khtml. I also maintain
> Arora.
> 
> I have no plans to work on rekonq but I also don't have any plans to
> work on it.
> 
> Felix was looking at taking over Rekonq but his conclusion was as the
> bug says.

I build my own version of rekonq and 2.4.0 is the most stable version I every 
had. I just copied to debian dir for building, i.e. I did not really put work 
into it.

The author of rekonq recommends the latest qtwebkit release.

"People reported, in this 40 days since rekonq 2.3.0 release, a lot of crash 
bugs that can be fixed just upgrading from QtWebKit 2.3.0 to QtWebKit 2.3.1."
http://adjamblog.wordpress.com/2013/06/23/rekonq-2-3-1/

It is sad, that we have in sid only an outdated release

rd@blackbox:~/SW.nobackup$ apt-cache policy libqtwebkit4
libqtwebkit4:
  Installiert:           2.2.1-7
  Installationskandidat: 2.2.1-7
  Versionstabelle:
 *** 2.2.1-7 0
        600 http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/debian/ jessie/main i386 Packages
        300 http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/debian/ sid/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
     2.2.1-5 0
        500 http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/debian/ wheezy/main i386 Packages
rd@blackbox:~/SW.nobackup$ 

*and* there is with Jose a volunteer who would want to work on qtwebkit. 

I keep hoping that you bring enough (non-technical skills) to get your dispute 
resolved...with a better result for Debian.

Kind regards
Rainer


-- 
Rainer Dorsch
http://bokomoko.de/