https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
--- Comment #7 from Christophe Giboudeaux ---
(In reply to Luke-Jr from comment #6)
>
> Won't you reconsider, please?
No, unless Qt supports another web engine, this won't change.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug chang
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
--- Comment #6 from Luke-Jr ---
Upstream Chromium seems to have major security issues every month. QtWebEngine
gets updated far less frequently, and often goes months or longer vulnerable to
easily exploited issues.
Won't you reconsider, please?
--
Y
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
Laurent Montel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mon...@kde.org
Status|REPORTED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
--- Comment #4 from Luke-Jr ---
Even when QtWebEngine is ported, I don't intend to install/use it. Javascript
is a security hazard. Same goes for QtWebKit.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
--- Comment #3 from Christoph Feck ---
Your end goal probably would be QtWebEngine support for your platform.
I very much doubt KDEPIM will revert the work of the recent years to go back to
the (long unmaintained) QtWebKit, but I let KDEPIM developers
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
--- Comment #2 from Luke-Jr ---
My end goal is to use KDEPIM without QtWebEngine.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=399831
--- Comment #1 from Christoph Feck ---
The messageviewer in KMail requires QtWebEngine anyway. Do you have a usecase
for using kmailtransport outside of KDEPIM applications?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
