Chalk it up to cache invalidation issues 🙃

Likely caused by a revision change in the slide show, one was taken out before slide 11, most of the slides were updated, but this one got missed.

You'd think, but there's always so much jank.

I'm guessing what happened is that they didn't have numbering, and then later the people making the slides decided to add the numbers. There might be a ticket for programmatic numbers, but it'd be buried under a thousand other ones that are more important.

09 / 12, 11 / 13, 11 / 12

A bug is a bug. Someone needs to deal with it. The forum is for discussion, a bug report is to advise developers that there is a problem.

As a developer, I'm not looking at forums for bug reports, I'm looking at bug trackers.

As another dev I agree with the other reply. Even if it seems really small, it still is something that should eventually get fixed and therefore can be considered a bug. It makes it easier to track everything that needs to be done if it is all in thr bug tracker. Worst case scenario if it is considered irrelevant it will just be given an extremely low priority in the bug tracker.

To be fair, estimating file copy/move progress correctly is hard.

The most correct way would probably be to group small, medium and large files , so you don't get random small access, then cross-reference that with prior saved disk benchmarks. But you know, a bit over the top.

Although the grouping (and tar-ing the small files) would speed up the copy/move.