On Tue, 2014-10-14 at 11:07 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:46:00AM -0300, Evandro Giovanini wrote:
> "upstream doesn't put a logo" is not the full argument as it
doesn't take
> into account the *why* of that decision. They didn't put a logo in the
> panel because there was no room to put a logo there under the principles
> that guided their entire design. When someone who is not a designer, was
> not involved at all in that process, and doesn't even understand what went
> into it, comes in and starts making changes as if they were just cosmetic
> details you end up with a bad design.
I'm not trying to dictate the design. However, I am sharing a requirement;
So, all I can find on this topic in the Workstation PRD is the
following:
The working group will also specify policies in terms of
branding, theming and desktop graphics, although these items
will of course need to be in line with the overall Fedora
branding guidelines and styles.
I don't see how, from the above, you conclude that the use cases you
mentioned (e.g showing that the OS is Fedora Workstation while giving a
talk at a conference) are requirements.
> Let's not forget that a brand is not just a logo. Being the
best operating
> system with GNOME has become part of Fedora's brand, and something that has
> gained it quite a few users over recent years. Making the GNOME experience
> worse would in no way help the Fedora brand.
I find the suggestion that showing the Fedora logo would somehow "make the
experience worse" to be deeply troubling.
Depends where you put it. I can easily imagine lots of ways in which the
Fedora logo could make the experience worse. :)
--
Mathieu