Re: Why is Konqueror part of `kde-baseapps`
On Saturday, March 3, 2018 11:59:56 AM CET Albin Otterhäll wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Why is `konqueror`, `kwrite` and `keditbookmarks` part of the metapackage
> `kde-baseapps`?
I think I remember at some point that was shipped, by KDE, as a bundle:
If you go to this page:
https://packages.debian.org/sid/kdebase-apps
You can see the source package is:
https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/kde-baseapps
and the version number is 4:16.08.3-3
At this point, in the list below, you can find Konqueror.
If you follow that konqueror link, the version number is then different
(17.08)
Also if you go there:
https://github.com/KDE/kde-baseapps,
the latest commit is Nov. 2016
So we can observe a discrepancy, both in term of source packages and in term
of version numbers.
I think there is a sort of ongoing transition there.
(I think we already spoke about it when applications 17.08 were waiting in the
"new queue", and why there were new source packages... instead of "updated"
old ones... Not sure about the details.)
Chris
> This seems to be packages that nobody needs or uses, but is
> part of all predefined metapackages (by being part of `kde-baseapps`).
>
> When someone is installing `kde-plasma-desktop` or `kde-standard` they want
> a minimal desktop environment that they can shape to their liking. Bundling
> quite big applications that nobody uses doesn't seems to align with these
> metapackages purpose. Everyone -- or almost everyone -- uses Firefox
> instead of Konqueror; Nano or Vim is used instead of KWrite when you need a
> minimal text editor; and KEditBookmarks seems to be related to Konqueror.
>
> I guess that there's some reason that I've missed. Could you please
> enlighten me and explain? If there isn't really any reason why we bundle
> them with the metapackage, can we begin to discuss the possibility to
> remove them from `kde-baseapps`?
>
> Have a nice time!
>
> Regards,
> Albin
Reply to: