There’s also https://www.trinitydesktop.org/ which is a fork of KDE 3.5 still being maintained.

You can still move your folder from .config/librewolf/ to .librewolf/ and it will use it from there. At least, it works like that in Firefox (potentially to be removed in the future, but there’s no real reason to remove it any time soon).

But yeah, I don’t know how that works together with KeePassXC. I mean, if it worked on LibreWolf before, then presumably moving the folder back to .librewolf/ should fix it until KeePassXC is updated…

(And yes, the .config/ directory is specified by the XDG standard.)

(Also, good shout about the directory being relevant. I guess, that’s also why the extension is currently broken for me, because I was a bit too eager to switch to the .config/ dir. 🙃)

Oh, I think, you’re right. It was a patch by openSUSE at first, but then they integrated it in about:config.

Just saw this while flicking through the changelog and hadn’t heard of this when it was released. Perhaps too niche to report on for news pages. So, I figured, I’d post here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Yeah? You should still make a decision. If you want it possible to watch, star and fork the repo from any of the sub-pages, then that stuff has to live in that top ribbon.

But then you shouldn’t duplicate it into the Code sub-page. I’d work with split buttons, where you can look at who starred and you can add your own star, all from the same UI element. It would not even take up more space, since they do already display the count in the top ribbon as well.

Apparently this is how Codeberg does it (see e.g. this repo), so this might be where I have the idea from…

I mean, yeah, it can make sense to duplicate information. That screenshot isn’t supposed to say that all of these should be deduplicated.
But you really gotta be cautious with duplication, because it makes everything else harder to find. And I would absolutely argue that GitHub has crossed the line where they duplicate too much, across the board. It feels like design-by-committee.

This is entirely anecdotal, but what really dumbfounded me while annotating that screenshot, is that I never actually read the links in that “About” section.
I’ve seen this page probably a thousand times already, but I had no idea that there’s an “Activity” link there, which actually seems like it could be useful. Nor a link to the README, to the CONTRIBUTING.md or for “Custom Properties” (whatever that is).
I had no idea how to report a repo until now, even though the link is apparently always on screen.

There’s just so much info there, and it’s presented like read-only info, not like navigation links, so I always just skipped over the lines that don’t have numbers in them. I also genuinely never tried clicking any of these lines before…

I could rant a lot about the GitHub UX, so here’s just the fairly obvious stuff on the repository page:

Red arrows mean duplicated information or duplicated navigational elements.
Green arrow means why the fuck do I have to tell our customers to click a random link in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, in order to download our software?

Yeah, from what I understand, hardware manufacturers need to ensure that no one uses the mobile chip to send on reserved frequencies. And the way they typically do that, is with a proprietary, undocumented driver for the mobile chip. So, you basically need to reverse engineer that for each mobile chip, to be able to make calls and such…

Flohmarkt is probably the closest. Basically federated ebay.

https://codeberg.org/flohmarkt/flohmarkt

I believe, they chose a different behaviour for RMB, because otherwise you can’t right-click the background anymore to create subfolders etc., when you’re looking at a folder with lots of files/subfolders inside.

I don’t know, if Windows has a solution for this. I certainly wouldn’t be surprised, if they don’t.

5 minutes sounds like way too much, unless you mean a fresh compile. But then you shouldn’t need to wait that long between changes, since incremental compilation should kick in then.

And like sure you can break shit up into crates to speed up compilation, but to do that you already have to have a design you’re happy with and that’s stable.

I mean, if you have your modules structured in a tree structure and with proper visibility, then it isn’t a particularly big leap to put it into a separate crate. You just move the files, maybe fix some visibility modifiers still, and then a bit of boilerplate to add it to the workspace.

It’s only really when you’re publishing to crates.io, that you don’t particularly want to keep changing the names/scopes of the crates, as they’ll stick around on there for the foreseeable future.