Konqueror questions.

[Allen Winter]

On Tuesday 25 September 2007 11:28:06 am Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 September 2007, Tom Albers wrote:
> > At Tuesday 25 September 2007 15:17, you wrote:
> > > as for Konqueror ... we have a file manager that is in good shape, we
> > > need a power user browser and a web browser (konqi currently fills both
> > > of those). should we hold up 4.0 for it? i don't know.
> >
> > Yep. It has been defined as a goal which needs to be completed in the beta
> > period.
> >
> > > on a related note i finally got a chance to look through the page on
> > > techbase and saw that kmail was noted as a showstopper. i wonder what
> > > happened to the "people can run kde3's kdepim apps in kde4" consensus of
> > > just a few months ago to result in kmail becoming a *showstopper* for
> > > 4.0?
> >
> > Kmail is added to the list as it makes sure a basic set of libraries is
> > correctly functioning. We can not release with broken kio, or broken
> > certificate handling, identities broken, mailtransport lib not working and
> > everything else kmail makes use of.
> 
> and the only way we have of testing those things is an entire application for 
> which there may not be the develper resources for?
> 
> let's see:
> 
> - kio => how about just about every kde app out there?
> - cert handling => khtml?
> - identities => i assume you mean the address book? that one might be a bit 
> more difficult, yes
> - mailtransport => does this really matter if we don't have kde4 mail apps?
> 
> really it seems a bit back asswards to say "we need to ship this app to prove 
> that the libs that it uses are ok" ;) 
> 
> there are also tests in some of these libs; mailtransport has a little gui app 
> for testing as well. obviously automatically run unit tests would be great, 
> but obviously we probably don't have the resources to whip up as many as we'd 
> need. still ... it seems that we have other options than kmail here.
> 
> marking things all over the place as "showstoppers" may seem responsible from 
> a release perspective, 

we are the "release team" after all.
so it seems reasonable to look at things from a "release perspective".

> but .. yeah. kmail and kate as "showstoppers", given  
> the purpose and scope of 4.0 as a release along with our goals (e.g. 
> releasing in a reasonable time frame versus allowing ourselves to endlessly 
> delay things), seem a bit odd to me. 
> 
You also need to balance having a release that is somewhat useful
to somebody.  If all we want is a pretty desktop without any useful
apps then we have the KDE Development Platform out by 30Oct
and we are done.