I have not updated Librewolf since last time it worked (yesterday), but I’ll poke around in the settings to see.
I have not updated Librewolf since last time it worked (yesterday), but I’ll poke around in the settings to see.
Freetube exists for Android also.
Syncthing is your friend. Freetube stores playlists, history, settings and subscriptions as .db-files which you can sync between devices. Android version also allows access to these files if enabled in settings.
This is my solution also. I listen to audio books on my way to work, and read on an ebook-reader in the evening. Can be tricky to sync when the chapter structure is non-traditional though (e.g. Discworld).
But is it viable? I know very little of browser development, but my impression is that it is a lot of work to develop and keep the browsers secure. If Librewolf separated completely from upstream Firefox, would they be able to keep the browser secure without significantly expanding their team?
I ask in earnest, as I said I know very little about this.
I see many people say to just use forks of Firefox. I use Librewolf myself. However, are such forks not very dependent on upstream Firefox not being completely enshittified? Will it be possible to keep the forks free of all new bullshit, or does that at any point become a too difficult/comprehensive task for the maintainers?
But how do you access the files from another app? Where are they stored? I have nothing in the com.nextcloud.client folder for example. Proton Drive mounts in the left-hand menu of Files. Would be nice if that was achievable with Nextcloud also.
EDIT: Turns out it does if there is no app passcode enabled. Not sure I am comfortable having that turned off though.
Is Kdenlive no good? Always heard good things, but I don’t use those kinds of software.
Do you use KeePassDX on Android? If so, how do you access the vault from Nextcloud?
Specific supported devices, but the list keeps growing.
I use a Xiaomi Mi Band 7. Works pretty well for my needs.
Hoe do you sync it? I’ve been meaning to make the switch to these for a long time now, but still not gotten around to it.
I used to use it for that too, but since the API-thing I got the impression that they all stopped working due to rate limiting?
I love this for redirecting YouTube-links to FreeTube.
What you describe happened in Munich, at least. This is in another state.
Wow, thanks a lot for this thorough answer. I see I need to dust off the old employment contract and see what it says - I’ve had an assumption that any ownership my previous employer has pertains only to any discovery that could be commercialized through patents and spin-offs - this is not that. This work is academic research, and I was required to make any publication openly accessible (with CC-licenses) due to how the work was funded, and this code base contains all the analysis tools that underpin these publications.
The idea that a license added would only apply to code added after the license change is very funny.
I suppose it makes sense if it originally had a license, and you then change the license to be less permissive.
What is more difficult is that earlier commits won’t have that license explicitly unless you rewrite git history to make that happen (which is possible but tedious).
I will probably not do that, but I guess it factors into my second question: That I in that case should make sure to include it in all branches (which are not treated as branches in the common sense, but rather as forks within the repo - they will never be merged to the main branch).
check your contract, you might not own the code and your organization may have a process to determine how to license something.
Good point. I will need to double check the contract, but I believe the ownership restriction has more to do with patents and commercialization. All our output was in general meant to be made public.
Thanks for your answer.
- The license change won’t apply retroactively - I am not sure theres a legal way to retroactively change licenses and terms? I am recalling back to the Unity runtime fee, which they wanted to apply retroactively, but there was a lot of noise/discussion on whether it was legal to even do this.
OK, in that case it may not even make much sense to add a license. There will be no added code to this repo in the future, so there will nothing the new license would apply to.
- Once you have main released version of the repo that contains the license you want to use going forward, any branches from that point should contain license by default? Since its just a file in the main branch.
Yes, you kind of answered this in question 1. Since it is not retroactively applied, it won’t apply to the stale branches that only exist as snapshots of the code.
- Since you are using it commercially, and want to change the license for future versions, you will absolutely want to discuss this with whatever entity is using it. You could choose a license they refuse to accept, and end up not being able to use any future releases. My employer will not use copy-left style licenses for example.
Good point. This is not included in any software that is distributed, it is only a smaller part of an internal codebase used for data analysis. Does that not change things? But to be on the safe side, it would probably make sense to make it as permissive as possible to avoid any issues here. But then again, if it is not applied retroactively then nothing of the code used will be subject to any license. But good thing to remember for the future.
For the most part, I try to set up automatic data exports from these apps that is synced with my Nextcloud server, and my plan is to eventually develop something of a dashboard that allows me to easily view historical data from all these sources, but as of now it more a backup solution.
Yes, I’ve checked this, and it works in regular Firefox.