Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update logo to official svg logo #30

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lparsons
Copy link
Member

Update the logo to the official (fixed) US-RSE svg logo.

@vsoch
Copy link
Member

vsoch commented Nov 15, 2019

I don't approve - this logo is a simplified version that is much more elegant to begin with, see the site
https://us-rse.org/blog/.

@vsoch
Copy link
Member

vsoch commented Nov 15, 2019

@lparsons
Copy link
Member Author

Sorry, but the Steering Committee is not comfortable with an unofficial logo being used (esp on us-rse.org).

@lparsons
Copy link
Member Author

Let's try to get a version of the logo without the text but with all the design elements. I agree that it would be nice to have an official version without the added text... @cmaimone Is that doable?

@vsoch
Copy link
Member

vsoch commented Nov 15, 2019

Sorry, but the Steering Committee is not comfortable with an unofficial logo being used (esp on us-rse.org).

This is... not how you grow a community.

@lparsons
Copy link
Member Author

Pushed an update with a cleaner version of the logo with no words and no background.

@cmaimone
Copy link
Contributor

cmaimone commented Nov 15, 2019

@vsoch It could have been put better, but I think @lparsons was mostly sharing that the SC isn't comfortable with versions of the logo being used to represent the org that are significantly different -- there are versions with no text, and one that's just the center square that are variations we've used though.

I get that the comment effectively shut down discussion, but it is doesn't need to.

Other than the aesthetic argument about the logo generally (which is a separate discussion), is there something here we're missing?

@lparsons
Copy link
Member Author

I see how my comment wasn't well worded, but I honestly did not intend to shut down discussion. It was simply done in a hurry and too curt. For that I apologize.

@vsoch
Copy link
Member

vsoch commented Nov 15, 2019

Almost! The white lines should probably be white and not transparent?

9A61FC44-DBBD-45A6-9181-4231BE623F56

For reference, the current:

29DA7961-80FE-4CAE-B7A2-4D6B05EDD286

I’m sorry I’m really upset by these interactions, it doesn’t feel like community decisions, more like something else.

@lparsons
Copy link
Member Author

Almost! The white lines should probably be white and not transparent?

Agreed, I think the lines probably should be white. Might be more consistent with the other versions that way.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants