Talk:Konsole

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

Commands[edit]

Konsole doesn't provide the commands, they're provided by the operating system and/or the shell (builtins). What konsole does do is provide access to the commands. and "commonly used commands" applies to all *NIX variant systems, not just Konsole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Putz (talk • contribs)

Incomprehensible sentence[edit]

The third sentence of the article reads as follows: "The KDE applications Konqueror, Krusader, Kate, Konversation, Dolphin." It is either lacking a verb, or if "applications" is meant to be the verb it is unknown to me, hence the sentence is incomprehensible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.230.139.174 (talk) 12:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

window split[edit]

The term needs a WP:RS which explains it. Lacking that, the reader may be misled to believe that it shows a terminal with two (or more) viewports. The picture appears to show something different: the ability to show more than one tab at a time. TEDickey (talk) 10:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Konsole's licence[edit]

The source-code has numerous header comments saying GPL2 or later. TEDickey (talk) 21:41, 6 September 2019 (UTC) I belive konsole is licensed under GPL v2. On the konsole website https://kde.org/applications/system/org.kde.konsole it clearly states under licence " License Konsole is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL), Version 2. " KazMalKen (talk) 22:13, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's a webpage. Read the source code, which is authoritative TEDickey (talk) 22:26, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a serious disagreement with the KDE developers regarding their license, you should point out that their comments fall short of your expectations TEDickey (talk) 22:30, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the inconvenience, but on the konsole github page, I cannot find the license.

KazMalKen (talk) 22:37, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be in every source file, at the top (104 files, excluding ".ui" and similar generated files). If you read the source, you'll notice it. By the way, your most recent edit introduces another error by suggesting that Konsole contains subprojects. On the contrary, that is one (rather large) program. TEDickey (talk) 23:43, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now, since the developers explicitly used or later, the comment at the end of GPLv2 applies to Konsole. In some works (such as the Linux kernel), the developers chose to disallow "upgrading" to GPLv3. Since the developers of Konsole chose to allow this, stating "GPLv2" by itself can mislead the reader. For that reason, the GPL topic (unversioned) is often used in these topics. TEDickey (talk) 23:50, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, the links to COPYING, COPYING.DOC (besides not working as intended in the template) are not useful reliable sources for this topic, because it is the additional text provided by the developers in source-code (or perhaps a suitable readme file) that shows how they intend the boilerplate to apply to the program. Konsole does have readme files, but they do not mention the license. TEDickey (talk) 13:18, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Internals note[edit]

As written, lacking a date, the topic suggests to the reader that the "VT102" emulation is not actually part of the main Konsole source (though it's been there since 2000). The Internals note is largely irrelevant, since it provides no useful link to understand the editor's intention in discussing the pseudoterminal interface. Whether the issue is 7 years old or 15, that detail is entirely lacking TEDickey (talk) 11:05, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]