[rekonq] Re: [GSoC] Plasma integration

[Pierre Rossi]

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 13:34, Lionel Chauvin <megabigbug at yahoo.fr> wrote
>
>
> > In my opinion, Plasma is already too heavy, by trying to do everything,
> > it does not do a single thing right.
>

I tend to agree with that, I feel putting plasma in Rekonq would be
equivalent to removing the "lightweight" in front of "web browser"... :/


>
> > So I think the questions are really:
> > -How will that benefit our users?
>
> From the begining of the new tab page development we failed to propose a
> customizable space.
>
>
While I agree with that, I'm not certain plasma is the answer, maybe we
should think about what is the actual scope of a customizable tab page for a
web browser. I personally don't think CPU usage for instance is relevant
there.



> > -How that will make our life easier to develop the project?
>
> We decided to use html because it was easy to customize. In fact it was not
> so
> easy because many things was done in the C++ code of Rekonq.
> Pierre is improving it with javascript. It means it will be as hard as
> develop
> data engines and plasmoids.
>
>
My take on this is that having a html skeleton is not enough if the logic is
hidden inside rekonq, but then the only way of lowering the bar for this is
to have the logic done in javascript, I'm afraid it's as low as it gets
these days, plasma or QML won't lower it more, which means the only
"advantage" of having plasma would be the existing collection of plasmoids,
and that's what I'm not sure is relevant in a browser.

That was my two cents.

Cheers,
--
Pierre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/rekonq/attachments/20110211/10a68054/attachment.htm