Most important changes:
- multiple enhancements in experimental backend for QtWebEngine (Blink):
- added support for restoring tab history;
- added support for storing cookies;
- added support for fetching favicons;
- added option to overwrite User Agent;
- added support for cache;
- added support for private mode;
- added support for downloading files;
- added start page (speed dial);
- added MDI mode (disabled by default);
- added source viewer;
- added dropdown with list of recently typed URLs;
- added option to disable single key shortcuts;
- added support for freedesktop.org notifications;
- lots of other fixes and improvements.
Will there be 64-bit binaries? I only ask because I have Otter-64 on Win, not 32.
Edit: Nevermind. I see they will be delayed.
"Yoda's aphorism ("There is no 'try'") sounds neat, but it doesn't work for me. I have done most of my work while anxious about whether I could do the job, and unsure that it would be enough to achieve the goal if I did. But I tried anyway, because there was no one but me between the enemy and my city. Surprising myself, I have sometimes succeeded."
- Richard Stallman.
(It is about how hard is sometimes to develop free software)
Good news! The browser has more and more features in new releases Otter browser is more opera 12 than opera blink. Keep this work alive!
P.S When stable version will be released?
@timur dokhnadze, target date for 1.0 was moved to January, this should allow us to ship almost complete QtWebEngine backend (version which will be available in 5.6 has very high chance to finally become usable), in worst case scenario we could package snapshot from upstream release branch (hopefully Qt 5.6 won't get delayed as much as 5.5 is, this beta was supposed to ship with Qt 5.5.0 or even 5.5.1 for Windows and would use 5.5 beta if not one nasty regression, SELECT elements fail to show dropdown on click...).
Anyway, 1.0 is just a number, and this beta should be quite stable, especially comparing to previous one. ;-)
Obviously we are still missing some must have stuff (like address field completion, but at least there was some progress this time), I guess that we should consider to loosen our policy to avoid copy and paste from similar projects (with compatible licences of course) as they usually don't hesitate much to "get inspired" by our solutions (it's open source, they have right to do that).
Why is there even such a policy? The point of open source is to share code and not reinvent the wheel (as long as licenses are respected and authorship is attributed, of course)!
Congratulations for the new version, I'll try it when the win64 binaries are online but speed dial + source viewer (also of course MDI but I already have it in the weekly) sound great!
Congratulations! Sorry I haven't had much time lately. :)
I guess that we should consider to loosen our policy to avoid copy and paste from similar projects (with compatible licences of course) as they usually don't hesitate much to "get inspired" by our solutions (it's open source, they have right to do that).
GPL 3+ (or any later version) is a very good license it defends program against patent discrimination, it is compatible with apache license 2.0 and GPL 2 + (Means "or any later version" only). You can also relicense your software in GPL 4 + when it will be released (Copyleft is a very good) and more.
I'm not sure but i think you can relicense MIT and BSD licensed programs (and other permissive free software licence software).
@Al-Khwarizmi, for various reasons. ;-)
For example often these components were originally built on top of Qt4 which means that often they contain no longer needed workarounds for issues fixed long time ago or for API class not available back then.
In many cases it would require very big rewrite anyway, as other projects usually focus on single backend (AFAIK Otter is currently the only Qt based browser with abstraction layer which allows to support multiple backends, but I know that at least one other project wants to use the same concept) or underlying APIs are very different.
Another issue is ability to relicense when there would be a need to do so (for example if we would need to move some portions of code to LGPL etc.), contacting contributors from external repository is harder, especially if such repository would become unavailable.
Also apparently our solutions are sometimes better, as they become inspiration for other projects. :-D
This beta works much better, I deliberately skipped several minor upgrades, just to see the larger steps. And here we have it. :)
On Win 8.1 (to which I was forced by MS to upgrade) it is even faster than FF.
This release screwed up the interface for me. Specifically, the toolbar where the address bar is became unusable. Clean profile shows up normal, so it must be something with my own settings that I have not yet managed to hunt down. At any rate, it was not due to my modified toolBars.json This was an obvious idea that I tested and turned out not to be the cause at all.
Due to this and a few other reasons, I am now in the long tedious process of rebuilding my profile.
@ersi, what exactly got broken? Configuration or layout?
The navigation bar (the toolbar where the address bar is) only displayed three first buttons. This was the most visible issue. I tried changing things as I described previously, but it didn't help. I had to start anew with a clean profile. Now I am little by little restoring things.
@ersi, that might happen if toolbar doesn't have enough space to show all items, it's default behavior of QToolBar.
I was checking for updates today, and notice the Full Builds version number is higher then the current beta build I am using. Did it go to full release now?