In addition to what magicalist said, here is some more information:
The Firefox Search widget is indeed installed by default but not activated by default. You can use it either by adding it to the home screen or via the “swipeup” gesture.
A problem is that it seems to have its own “Clear search history” and does not obey the one from the Firefox privacy settings.
Another problem is that you may activate it and set it as permanent default for the “swipeup” gesture by accident, and then there seems to be no way to change it to something else unless you install some other application that provides a “swipeup” action, in which case you are presented again with the interface to choose your default swipeup action.
This is a general problem in Android. An app that can help you change easily the default swipeup action is the Swipeup Utility:
You can use Swipeup Utility to set the default swipeup action to Nothing, or you can use it to clear the default of the swipeup gesture, so that you are a presented with the interface to chose a default again.
Last, the Firefox Search widget does not allow only Google Search. It is set to whatever your default search provider is in Firefox.
Mine defaults to Yahoo, which is exactly what you'd expect from the Firefox Search app. It's just a launcher intent that was registered when you installed Firefox.
According to the bottom box on that page, your search history should have been cleared from the steps you took. Sounds like a bug.
edit: you can prove this to yourself by going to Settings -> Apps -> Firefox, scrolling down to the "Launch By Default" section and clicking the "Clear Defaults" button. The next time you drag up from the bottom, your phone will ask you what you want to launch by default (assuming you still have other launchers, e.g. the Google App installed).
Maybe contacting their hosting provider could be an additional way to approach the problem, since, from what I can tell, the messages they send to contributors are spam.
We (Django) already threatened that a while back. They still insist they will not remove projects or stop collecting donations on behalf of non-consenting projects. All they did was manually disable some of the spam coming toward our committers.
Emailing someone in Canada now requires consent (various legal ways) or close personal relationship. It doesn't cost anything to report them https://services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/rapidsccm/Default-Defaut.asp... .
But if you really wanted to pursue them, you would have to hire a lawyer, a complaint doesn't have the same weight or speed of a legal filing.
This just goes to show you has clueless the developers are with regards to international policy and law.
You do realise that there is life and even entire civilizations outside of the USA, where DMCA holds no jurisdiction and the entire idea of suing becomes much more complicated? Especially when it seems from the GitHub discussion thread the tip4commit founder lives in a place where there is no regulations regarding what is a spam and what is not. ;)
Maybe, but if they make it clear that they're not sponsored or endorsed by the project in question, it'd probably be considered nominative fair use, at least in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_use
They are soliciting donations using the project name. I don't think that falls into nominative use. It'd be really weird if I could use the logo of the Salvation Army to solicit donations for my own organization even if I intended to give some of the donated money to them.
I think so, yes. See Iceweasel[0], the custom Debian build of Firefox. I'm not sure that you'd be successful in using trademark law in this particular scenario though.
If you want to support Django and its community and development (which includes more than just commits to a git repository), there is also a mechanism to donate to the DSF:
KeePass 1.x does not support the new database format and saves its databases as KDB files. KeePass 2.x uses the new database format (KDBX) and it can also import KDB databases created with KeePass 1.x.
I use the same combination myself (KeePassDroid on Android, KeePassX 2 alpha on Linux, KeePass 2 on Windows) with a single KDBX database and I can read the database fine on all OSes. However, I avoid editing the database on Android and on Linux, since KeePassX 2 is still alpha, while KDBX support in KeePassDroid is still experimental.
Try Keepass2Android - it uses the Mono libraries of Keepass 2 running natively on Android, and now supports merging external changes to the database. I've been using it for 6 months now without a hiccup.
Pull requests this late in the -rc cycle should contain only important bugfixes, other changes should normally wait for the next kernel release.
For example Linus ignored some pull requests sent for 3.6-rc2 that didn't really belong there:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/8/16/577
Replying to myself... For anyone interested, here are two screenshots showing the Mathematical Operators blocks of Liberation Mono and Droid Sans Mono in the current Debian Sid:
According to Microsoft’s own “Windows Hardware Certification Requirements for Client and Server Systems”,[0] on non-ARM systems it is obligatory to offer the ability to disable Secure Boot:
QUOTATION START
18. Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. A Windows Server may also disable Secure Boot remotely using a strongly authenticated (preferably public-key based) out-of-band management connection, such as to a baseboard management controller or service processor. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems.
This requirement is only for other vendors to get the certification from Microsoft. Microsoft itself does not need to conform to it, so it is still possible that their products will be locked.
This is important news and I am happy a first step is taken.
I am not sure about the accuracy of the title of the submitted post though. The official EU text, as reported in the post,[1] does not scold or name anyone. The scolding comes from a press release of the Pirate Party.
1. “[The European Parliament] considers it likely that there will be a growing number of European companies whose activities are effectively dependent on being able to accept payments by card; considers it to be in the public interest to define objective rules describing the circumstances and procedures under which card payment schemes may unilaterally refuse acceptance”
The headline has, as always, an amount of liberty in summarizing the article to a few words.
The person responsible for inserting the text into the report, who is a Member of the European Parliament, and therefore in some sense representing this particular piece of text, names WikiLeaks and the donation blockade specifically.
(This is on Android, BTW.)