The European Commission (EC) has been funding zenodo.org[0] for some years now, which is an open-source publishing platform[1] built on an open-source digital library framework[2]. While its main focus is providing free hosting and serving as a publishing venue for scientific data and results in order to enable reproducibility of the research, it can also be used (by anyone!) to "publish" their research (or just about anything you'd want to publish).
While I guess it's not technically a journal as there's no editorial or review process for what gets published (and absolutely no prestige associated with publishing on it), everything is assigned a DOI number which you could use to uniquely identify it for citation purposes.
The story behind it, as off-handedly told to me by the then-project manager back in 2015 when I was working on it, is that it was created after the EC had mandated that some percentage of EC-funded research results be published in open-access and the instutions which received such funding complained that there existed no proper open-access alternatives for them to publish in.
Modal editors are the only solution I've come across to what I see as the problem with modern keyboards and editors: the inability to do everything you want to do without moving your hands away from the home row. Intellij, eclipse, sublime text, every "modern" non-modal editor I've used expects me to move my hands to the arrow keys if I want to move the caret. This is a personal gripe for me as repeatedly moving my hand back and forth between the home row, the mouse and arrow keys triggers my RSI. At least a non-modified bash prompt lets me navigate using some archaic control key combinations (^a: beginning of line, ^e: end of line, ^f: forward one character, etc.)
Having to use the mouse to select/highlight/copy output I didn't know I was interested in until after it'd been outputted. Being able to export/open the currently visible history/output to an editor would be great.
> - What do you love about terminals?
Unless I'm suddenly interested in the output of a previously run command that can't be reproduced, I can interface with them without using the mouse at all.
>The change I'd most like to see to Apple's Terminal.app is that when I want make an edit to the middle of a command line that has not been sent to the shell yet, I can use the pointing device to move the cursor to the location of the intended edit.
I recall being able to do this by holding down the alt key as I left clicked where I wanted the cursor to be relocated.
There's nothing wrong with mouse support in itself. Being able to move the cursor, select text, and in general interface with the OS or an application using a mouse is great. However being _forced_ to use the mouse for any kind of general OS or application interfacing feels like an injustice. A macOS specific example would be moving a window between desktops. The last time I used macOS there was no native way to do this without using the mouse. I had to drag the window to the desired desktop (either by dragging it towards the edge of the current desktop or by going to the desktop overview mode and dragging it onto the desired desktop).
I use the "mac" variant option for the US QWERTY layout (`setxkbmap us -variant mac`). This functions as a regular US QWERTY layout, but I've access to various "special" characters and latin extended characters (e.g. æåøœ¡), as well as ^'"`~ as dead keys (to create îûéèñũäüö or whatever) via a modifier key (I use alt, but you can set it to whatever).
This allows me to use a single functional keyboard layout to write English, Norwegian _and_ code in.
While I guess it's not technically a journal as there's no editorial or review process for what gets published (and absolutely no prestige associated with publishing on it), everything is assigned a DOI number which you could use to uniquely identify it for citation purposes.
The story behind it, as off-handedly told to me by the then-project manager back in 2015 when I was working on it, is that it was created after the EC had mandated that some percentage of EC-funded research results be published in open-access and the instutions which received such funding complained that there existed no proper open-access alternatives for them to publish in.
[0]: http://about.zenodo.org/
[1]: https://github.com/zenodo
[2]: https://github.com/inveniosoftware