Le Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:51:33 +0200,
Cédric Krier <[email protected]> a écrit :

> There is two factors that generates those changes:
> 
>     - Trying to make forget bad image
>     - An new direction for the company/product
> 
> I think we are in any of both cases.

I think this is a simplistic, black-and-white (hehe) vision of the
subject.


> > First, this brings some freshness (and shows to people that there
> > is some activity)
> 
> If it is the only way for a project to show it is living

No, it is not. The image of Tryton must reflect his nature, and the
project is evolving, and so does the image.

> than it is
> in really bad shape. This will be the worst cases (first point of the
> two factors).
> 
> > and sometimes the change is made to fix issues with
> > old design (nobody is perfect).
> 
> You can fix design issue but keep the same spirit.

Nobody want to change the logo with a pink unicorn. We are talking
about a subtle gradient and a secondary color. Moreover, I think that
the Leonardo proposal follows the current spirit (maybe too much on some
points).


> > Simple example: the gradient at the bottom of the logo. IMO it looks
> > already old-fashioned (gradient are so '09 ...)
> 
> So for you the website must change every 2 years.

No it's just an early mistake that can be fixed easily. And I would like
to keep the result for a long time.


> I really prefer to spend times to improve the software than having
> such boring discussion on the website design.

I find talking about design and image rather exciting. It's your
right to find it boring, but it shouldn't be an excuse to reject any new
idea on the subject.


> > but at the same time we are not afraid of change if we see it
> > as an improvement. So, I think we should have the same approach with
> > the image of Tryton.
> 
> Except that the code is visible only to the developpers.

What about the new search widget? It is quite a radical change.


> Moreover when such changes happen, we change all the code to work
> with the new design because we can master the code. But talking about
> external image, it is completly different, we don't master it. We
> already have some issues with some guys using old/wrong logo, wrong
> name (Tryton ERP) etc. Changing the image of the project must be done
> with great caution.

1) Yes, this is why it's important to talk about it.
2) We shouldn't avoid of doing stuffs because they are difficult.


> I don't want that the Tryton project has the
> image (like some others follow my eyes) to change everything on each
> releases. Having a stable image is also a good message sent outside
> that we are stable and reliable (like the release policy, bugfix
> backport…)

Come on, we are talking about little modifications, nobody will think
that Tryton is unreliable or that we try to hide a bad image because of
them.


-- 
Bertrand Chenal

B2CK SPRL
Rue de Rotterdam, 4
4000 Liège
Belgium
Email: [email protected]
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

-- 
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to