KDE's Rekonq Browser Nears 1.0 w/ New Features

[Veerappan]

While Sync support in browsers is currently the thing to do, I've never met anyone who actually used it. OTOH it's quite hard to find a Firefox/Chrome user who's not using at least one extension these days.

I use Sync in Firefox all the time to keep my bookmarks synchronized between machines. I've got a laptop and desktop. My desktop is dual boot Windows7/Mint13, and my laptop triple boots Windows 7, Ubuntu 12.04, and Mac OS X 10.7. Because of Sync in Firefox, all of my bookmarks are the same on all of my OS installs, and I no longer have to remember which Firefox profile has the bookmark that I currently need to find.

Technically I use Firefox extensions because I do web development at work, and I have the Web Developer and Firebug extensions installed there. I don't currently use extensions on any of my personal systems.

[TheBlackCat]

While Sync support in browsers is currently the thing to do, I've never met anyone who actually used it. OTOH it's quite hard to find a Firefox/Chrome user who's not using at least one extension these days.

Yes, but I suspect a lot of people are using them for things that are built into rekonq. For example adblock, batch downloaderers, "speed dial", advanced web inspector, on-demand flash, and user agent switcher are all built into rekonq while firefox requires extensions.

I guess a better question is, what features does rekonq lack that you would want extensions for?

[Teho]

I guess a better question is, what features does rekonq lack that you would want extensions for?

There are many. For example I have transmission web interface extension that makes it easy to manage the remote torrent client. If I press torrent links it automaticly starts the download. Then I have extensions for Google Mail, Calendar and Reader making it easy to monitor the updates without going to the sites themselves. Then there are various little tweaks like removing scroll bars on all web pages, SSL enforcer, privacy extensions, (disconnected, ghostery...) and web site tweaks that are easier to manage than user scripts like StyleBot, Minimalist for Everything (Google products) and Reddit Enchancement suite. Chrome extension support would be totally awesome but I highly doubt that implementing it is trivial.

[steveriley]

Only thing I can find is source code from year 2010. Altough I remember hearing that somebody might work on it there isn't any such code in rekonq repository.

Try here: https://projects.kde.org/projects/ex...onq/repository

[Teho]

Try here: https://projects.kde.org/projects/ex...onq/repository

I did but there's isn't any Chrome extension support code if I'm not somehow missing it.

[Awesomeness]

QtWebKit is there only to ease up the transition. WebKit is the most important part of browser and obviouly having up to date version is top priority.

The Qt project is open to include new WebKit snapshots for the WebKit1 API (WebKit1 and WebKit2 are just API versions which say nothing about the WebKit source code itself).
The rekonq authors might think that the state of the WebKit1 module is good enough until further 5 sync services are supported.

To make myself clear: I'm not bashing the code author. He can obviously do with his time whatever he wants. I merely state that I fail to understand Blue Systems’ decision to seemingly pay him to do whatever he wants instead of what I perceive to be a feature potential Blue Systems customers would prefer to see. (Maybe I'm wrong but that is my perception for now.)

Only thing I can find is source code from year 2010. Altough I remember hearing that somebody might work on it there isn't any such code in rekonq repository.

Obviously not. Rekonq is in a git repository. As usual for DVCSs, unfinished features are in another branch and not merged until ready. In this case the branch seems to not even be public (he writes “in a local branch”): https://adjamblog.wordpress.com/2012...d-other-jokes/

Yes, but I suspect a lot of people are using them for things that are built into rekonq. For example adblock, batch downloaderers, "speed dial", advanced web inspector, on-demand flash, and user agent switcher are all built into rekonq while firefox requires extensions.

I guess a better question is, what features does rekonq lack that you would want extensions for?

Well, considering that rekonq does not even support user scripts (the easiest kind of extensions to support), let's begin with Greasemonkey (yes, I know: wrong API but you asked about extensions in general, not only Chrome API extensions).
Flash under Linux is absolutely unbearable IMO and I won't use any browser that does not allow me to use https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/87011