On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:07:56 +0300, Eli Wapniarski eli@orbsky.homelinux.org wrote:
On Monday 15 June 2009 15:09:10 Eelko Berkenpies wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2009 12:48:14 -0400, Ben Boeckel MathStuf@gmail.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Eelko Berkenpies wrote:
There is being worked on one; http://rekonq.sourceforge.net/
I don't know if it will be a default browser but it makes an
good
alternative for Konqueror anyway. :)
I'm working on getting it properly packaged for Fedora. I got
an older
package wrapped up here: http://berkenpies.nl/rekonq/ (spec
needs work for
the new version, 0.1.0, and I have to make sure I got
everything covered
for review). The plan is to get it in to review before the
end of next
week.
We'll see how it goes. I'm not holding by breath for these Konqueror replacements. The project making the KPart to get WebKit integration is the one that, IMO, is Doing It Right instead of making a new browser from scratch.
- --Ben
Alright, I managed to wrap things up (a bit later as expected though). But hey, better late then never they say. :)
I've packaged rekonq 0.1.0 for F11 and F12/rawhide. It should pretty
much
comply with the Package Guidelines and I'll submit it for review later. Although I'd appreciate it if someone could check it out if they are interested in a small, nifty, KDE4 browser.
Fedora 11:
http://kaboon.fedorapeople.org/rekonq/0.1.0/F11/rekonq-0.1.0-1.fc11.i586.rpm
Rawhide:
http://kaboon.fedorapeople.org/rekonq/0.1.0/F12/rekonq-0.1.0-1.fc12.i586.rpm
Everything (spec / sources / rpms): http://kaboon.fedorapeople.org/rekonq/0.1.0/
Unfortunately I will not have the time to review. However, I have just rebuilt the package of f11 x86_64. For an alpha version it certainly is promising, but there are still an awful lot of rough spots.
The effort is very much appreciated
Eli
Thanks for having a look at it. The fact that it looks promising drew my attention too. As far as I know some of the issues have been polished already and a new version might be released soon. 0.1.2 is in the current development GIT repository.
<shameless ad> The review request is now up at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506232 </shameless ad>