I love that you went through the effort of editing Stallman in and the text on the back, hope you’ve done the honors in GIMP (Great Intellectual Meme Picture)

Damn, I tux rolled a masterpiece today

Not judging but just fyi, that’s like the worst of both worlds tbh. The point of installing independently of the base system is that the system is immutable and easy to roll back to a previous state, if you use a mutable system and also install packages with other means, you’re working around a limitation that isn’t even there and wasting more space to get almost none of the benefits (aside from easier permission control for Flatpaks)

That’s https://hackertyper.com/ that I know of

When did you get so tasteful?

This is an incredibly sane dissection, wasn’t expecting it under a meme

Open the sidebar, tap the top right three dot menu, tap Add Account

Proton explicitly enabled keeping 2 free accounts on the mobile apps quite some time ago, probably more than a year, so they’re cool with you having 2 like that.

If you get more, you’ll be hampered at the application level, but, unless it’s like a load of accounts for spam purposes, having just a handful shouldn’t get you banned, I believe

I think your subconscious switched up the letters to induce the funny

.bashrc greeter? ;-;

Not saying that neofetch going away was a good thing tho

Math is a human right

Selling is outside the scope of the licence, you can do whatever you want with monetisation, be it free or paid-for.
But any one person that uses your GPL if local, AGPL if local or through a remote service, has the right to request you a copy of the code and you have an obligation to comply and provide it

Copyleft protects the freedom of the user, regardless of who is the developer, I think that is way more important if what we want is to make software for humanity rather than pragmatic business choices.
It is a point of what you regard as real freedom, do you wish to eventually lock in your users or let who might fork/take over your project do that?

I know, but that feels really clunky to me, like an unclean solution, I know that commit will disappear regardless, but I don’t like room for more human error like that by manually re-editing

I see, now that makes sense to me as well! I too make commits messily as thoughts crop up, so I think this technique might be good for me in some cases, thanks!

Hmm, that sounds like it could be what I’m looking for, had never consider you could branch while in the middle of a rebase, nice!

That looks pretty crazy! I kinda want to unlock this power ngl

How does cherry picking improve the workflow? I’m not sure I understand, is it so you can keep the original branch as reference and know where you could have screwed up if it happens?

Not exactly, because n commits will have been squashed into one, so making the edit would lose the reference to the originals which should have been squashed with other commits, visually maybe this helps:

A (pick) -> B (squash) -> C (squash) -> D (pick)

When it should have been:

A (pick) -> B (squash) -> D (pick) -> C (squash)

I had just created A+B+C, then realised C should have been out

My issue wasn’t so much if it managed to run and more of “I don’t want this change to have happened here” kind of thing, still that’s a neat tool! I wish I could use it, but the codebase I’m working on is in such a hugely sorry state, no testing suite set up is the last of the many problems that most likely won’t be solved because they’re not “important enough”, not like features (built with cardboard and duct tape), yeah we can’t allocate much time at all to code quality and general work for the project infrastructure if we can call it that.
About the generic advice of making smaller rebases one by one, yes, I’ll learn to do that, I also solved it like that in the end