That’s a valid point, though it looks like Popfile’s installation instructions call for manually installing libraries, presumably current ones. I think it processes only text, not PDFs or images, which are traditional sources of vulnerabilities. I’m fairly certain it doesn’t attempt to execute Javascript. It is, itself written in Perl, which is memory-safe.

It’s worth considering security because there’s so much malware out there trying to spread indiscriminately, but Popfile is less vulnerable than an Android app (which bundles its dependencies) or anything written in C (which is subject to all kinds of memory management bugs).

Abandoned doesn’t necessarily imply no longer useful. Sometimes, though rarely in the modern world software is finished.

I may give it a try. It does actually have the features I’m asking for.

Can we do Emacs vs. Vi next?

Yes, a code-oriented one meant to be very fast and responsive. It’s pre-alpha on Linux but compiles without any fuss for me. I haven’t spent much time with it, but the only bug I’ve seen so far is an uncommanded theme change when switching between files.

I’ve been using one of the Javascript variants of this for a while. While that is a little heavier weight for the client than this completely static solution, it’s ultimately just a few kilobytes and minimal processing that’s fast even on old devices.

The EFF has a good document on this topic.

There are a number of commands an operating system can safely give to the charge controller. Examples include:

• Run the device from external power; do not charge the battery
• Limit/taper charge to X percent/voltage (assuming X is under the maximum)
• Limit the charge rate to (something under the maximum)

Lower-level control could potentially allow extremely dangerous operations like unbalancing the cells or overcharging the battery, which would be bad.

I like Arch, but a first-time install of Arch for a beginner who doesn’t have a lot of patience for reading documentation and troubleshooting is not good advice.

Emacs has several templating/snippet packages available, such as YASnippet.

I mainly use Kwrite and Kate

Kate Snippets

I was more interested in what Windows gets right.

darktable in nowhere near light room

What’s missing?

It’s not a rhetorical question. Clearly articulating how open source software can be improved helps to improve it.

Gnumeric is nice and lightweight, but unlikely to satisfy people who are looking for a lot of features.

What are your favorite features of the Windows 10 file manager? Listing what you miss from other operating systems can help the Linux ecosystem to improve.

To quote its author

On X11 systems, XScreenSaver is two things: it is both a large collection of screen savers; and it is also the framework for blanking and locking the screen.

In the modern era, the main purpose of a screen saver is to lock the screen, and has been for most users for a long time. Many of us would also like to have pretty pictures on our locked screens.

It no longer has anything to do with preventing burn-in, so you’re right from a certain point of view.

Screen locking has obvious use cases.

i dont remember seeing that quote anywhere

It’s not a quote. It’s what their decisions say to me. I don’t think we’re likely to come to an agreement about whether their decisions were patronizing, and that’s fine - it’s a matter of opinion more than objective fact.

if i remember correctly you only need an account if you want to install extensions on stable

That’s not correct. Stable doesn’t allow it at all, and an account is required for nightly.

As for a roadmap, saying the intend to open up extension support soon isn’t that big a promise since the support already exists and is just locked out by default.

I’m going to call an app developer saying “users are not sophisticated enough to make good decisions about add-ons even if we warn them about incompatibility” as showing a superior attitude toward users.

Ultimately, my objection to how they handled it isn’t that some effort was required to install extensions. Instead, it’s that:

• It requires an account. There’s no good reason for it to work that way, and it’s antithetical to the goals of privacy and anonymity that Mozilla otherwise seems to support.
• For years, there was no roadmap for broader extension support, leading developers to not waste effort on making extensions compatible.

mozilla did not want to expose this situation to “normal users”

That’s patronizing.

A checkbox to enable full extensions support and a clickthrough warning on anything that didn’t explicitly support the new version for Android would have been more than adequate.