On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 10:38 -0700, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan <
> Recall that I asked in response to Kevin's statement that "A non
> browser will NEVER be an option for a KDE spin no matter how often
> ask for it." Saying that Konqueror is KDE's browser because
> is KDE's browser is kind of begging the question.
I think then what you were trying to ask was "what would be
considered as qualifying as a KDE browser". For me, the only way you
can be a KDE browser is to show up in that application list as
sponsored by the KDE project (or whatever it is called now).
That's essentially the same answer as before. I still have no idea what
a KDE browser is supposed to be other than it's something labelled as
such by the KDE Project. If that's the case then Kevin's original
comment boils down to "you aren't going to get something in a KDE Spin
that we don't decide to include in it", which is just tautogical.
Not wishing to be cynical, but it sounds uncomfortably close to Not
Invented Here Syndrome. There has to be more to it than that.