Git Branding Overview, Re: Git.or.cz Experimental Design

> Hello Petr:
> I hope you are doing well.  I was looking at the git.or.cz site tonight and
> thought it could perhaps use a little freshening up from a design
> standpoint.  Therefore, I messed around with the default stylesheet and the
> home page a bit and made a logo.  You can take a look at the experimental
> design at this address...
> http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
> 
> It's really just a few little changes.  If you're interested in implementing
> any of this into the current site, feel free to grab the changes from my
> github git repository.  You can see the few text changes in the diff...
> http://github.com/bilson/gitorcz_redesign/tree/master

>  Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:11:02PM -0400, David Baldwin wrote:
>> Hello Petr:
>> I hope you are doing well.  I was looking at the git.or.cz site tonight and
>> thought it could perhaps use a little freshening up from a design
>> standpoint.  Therefore, I messed around with the default stylesheet and the
>> home page a bit and made a logo.  You can take a look at the experimental
>> design at this address...
>> http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
>>
>> It's really just a few little changes.  If you're interested in implementing
>> any of this into the current site, feel free to grab the changes from my
>> github git repository.  You can see the few text changes in the diff...
>> http://github.com/bilson/gitorcz_redesign/tree/master
>
>  I'm not sure if this is really an improvement on the current state,
> but then again, the current state pretty much matches my idea and maybe
> others will agree that your proposal is better. Thus, it's better to
> show this to the Git community at large. :-)
>
>  If you or anyone is shooting for a re-design, I would suggest to
> somehow relate to the current "Git brandings" in use:
>
>        http://git.or.cz/git-logo.png
>        http://henrik.nyh.se/uploads/git-logo.png
>
>  If you think you have a cooler logo, that's fine too, but then it's
> again better to present it explicitly, I believe. The latter is used
> especially within mSysGit, the former is used more widely - at the
> current homepage, as Gitweb logo, and in various modifications like
>
>        http://git.nyh.se/git-favicon.png
>        http://members.cox.net/junkio/git.png
>        http://unfuddle.com/images/screens/source.big.jpg
>                (top left ;)
>
> --
>                                Petr "Pasky" Baudis
> GNU, n. An animal of South Africa, which in its domesticated state
> resembles a horse, a buffalo and a stag. In its wild condition it is
> something like a thunderbolt, an earthquake and a cyclone. -- A. Pierce
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

>   If you or anyone is shooting for a re-design, I would suggest to
> somehow relate to the current "Git brandings" in use:
> 
> 	http://git.or.cz/git-logo.png
> 	http://henrik.nyh.se/uploads/git-logo.png
> 
>   If you think you have a cooler logo, that's fine too, but then it's
> again better to present it explicitly, I believe. The latter is used
> especially within mSysGit, the former is used more widely - at the
> current homepage, as Gitweb logo, and in various modifications like
> 
> 	http://git.nyh.se/git-favicon.png
> 	http://members.cox.net/junkio/git.png
> 	http://unfuddle.com/images/screens/source.big.jpg
> 		(top left ;)

> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:11:02PM -0400, David Baldwin wrote:
>> http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
>  I'm not sure if this is really an improvement on the current state,
> but then again, the current state pretty much matches my idea and maybe
> others will agree that your proposal is better. Thus, it's better to
> show this to the Git community at large. :-)

> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:11:02PM -0400, David Baldwin wrote:
>>> http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
>>  I'm not sure if this is really an improvement on the current state,
>> but then again, the current state pretty much matches my idea and maybe
>> others will agree that your proposal is better. Thus, it's better to
>> show this to the Git community at large. :-)
> 
> FWIW, I like it. I like both the better font and whitespace layout and
> the 3-color-spot-merge-to-white. As Petr says, we have had the
> (apologies, but to me) ugly logo for a while, so it is widely used,
> and perhaps it has even grown on people.
> 
> BazaarNG managed to grab the best concept logo of the lot, IMHO, with
> the 'merge' roadsign.
> 
>>  If you think you have a cooler logo, that's fine too, but then it's
>> again better to present it explicitly, I believe.
> 
> Can we separate the 2 things? The better fonts and layout look like a win to me.
> 
> WRT the logo, the current one is not a particularly strong image, and
> we haven't spent millions in plastering it over magazines or anything.
> So a good new logo would be something to take on.

> Martin Langhoff venit, vidit, dixit 20.07.2008 23:50:
> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:11:02PM -0400, David Baldwin wrote:
> > > > http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
> > > I'm not sure if this is really an improvement on the current state,
> > > but then again, the current state pretty much matches my idea and maybe
> > > others will agree that your proposal is better. Thus, it's better to
> > > show this to the Git community at large. :-)
> > 
> > FWIW, I like it. I like both the better font and whitespace layout and
> > the 3-color-spot-merge-to-white. As Petr says, we have had the
> > (apologies, but to me) ugly logo for a while, so it is widely used,
> > and perhaps it has even grown on people.
> > 
> > BazaarNG managed to grab the best concept logo of the lot, IMHO, with
> > the 'merge' roadsign.
> > 
> > > If you think you have a cooler logo, that's fine too, but then it's
> > > again better to present it explicitly, I believe.
> > 
> > Can we separate the 2 things? The better fonts and layout look like a win to
> > me.
> > 
> > WRT the logo, the current one is not a particularly strong image, and
> > we haven't spent millions in plastering it over magazines or anything.
> > So a good new logo would be something to take on.
> 
> I like that new logo (plusminus G), too, it's very descriptive. I just want to
> raise one question which I can't answer myself:
> 
> Are there any potential issues with the Helvetica license?
> 
> In any case it may be safer do redo it with a GPL sans serif font. If one
> wants to keep the association of the shape of "G" with a circular arrow then
> FreeSans and Nimbus Sans L seem to be the only options.
> 
> Alternatively, it may be easier to redo it in plain PS. I'll attach 2 KISS
> variants. 1.5k for the eps, 3 colors only.

> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Michael J Gruber wrote:
> 
>> Martin Langhoff venit, vidit, dixit 20.07.2008 23:50:
>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:11:02PM -0400, David Baldwin wrote:
>>>>> http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
>>>> I'm not sure if this is really an improvement on the current state,
>>>> but then again, the current state pretty much matches my idea and maybe
>>>> others will agree that your proposal is better. Thus, it's better to
>>>> show this to the Git community at large. :-)
>>> FWIW, I like it. I like both the better font and whitespace layout and
>>> the 3-color-spot-merge-to-white. As Petr says, we have had the
>>> (apologies, but to me) ugly logo for a while, so it is widely used,
>>> and perhaps it has even grown on people.
>>>
>>> BazaarNG managed to grab the best concept logo of the lot, IMHO, with
>>> the 'merge' roadsign.
>>>
>>>> If you think you have a cooler logo, that's fine too, but then it's
>>>> again better to present it explicitly, I believe.
>>> Can we separate the 2 things? The better fonts and layout look like a win to
>>> me.
>>>
>>> WRT the logo, the current one is not a particularly strong image, and
>>> we haven't spent millions in plastering it over magazines or anything.
>>> So a good new logo would be something to take on.
>> I like that new logo (plusminus G), too, it's very descriptive. I just want to
>> raise one question which I can't answer myself:
>>
>> Are there any potential issues with the Helvetica license?
>>
>> In any case it may be safer do redo it with a GPL sans serif font. If one
>> wants to keep the association of the shape of "G" with a circular arrow then
>> FreeSans and Nimbus Sans L seem to be the only options.
>>
>> Alternatively, it may be easier to redo it in plain PS. I'll attach 2 KISS
>> variants. 1.5k for the eps, 3 colors only.
> 
> You could have spared yourself the trouble:

> Johannes Schindelin venit, vidit, dixit 21.07.2008 13:20:
>> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Michael J Gruber wrote:
>>>
>>> I like that new logo (plusminus G), too, it's very descriptive.
>>> I just want to raise one question which I can't answer myself:
>>>   Are there any potential issues with the Helvetica license?
>>>
>>> In any case it may be safer do redo it with a GPL sans serif
>>> font. If one wants to keep the association of the shape of "G"
>>> with a circular arrow then FreeSans and Nimbus Sans L seem to be
>>> the only options.

>>> Alternatively, it may be easier to redo it in plain PS. I'll
>>> attach 2 KISS variants. 1.5k for the eps, 3 colors only.
>>
>> You could have spared yourself the trouble:
> 
> Thanks for the appreciation ;)
> 
>> http://repo.or.cz/w/msysgit.git?a=blob_plain;f=share/resources/gitlogo.svg;h=c0d67e70ab31394f0635c141998e512437a138b4;hb=HEAD
>> Done without the use of any font at all.
> 
> I don't think that was on the wiki before. Henrik's version (which
> was, and was being discussed here) *is* based on Helvetica.

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Michael J Gruber wrote:
>
>> Martin Langhoff venit, vidit, dixit 20.07.2008 23:50:
>> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:39 PM, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 11:11:02PM -0400, David Baldwin wrote:
>> > > > http://baldwindev.com/git.or.cz/
>> > > I'm not sure if this is really an improvement on the current state,
>> > > but then again, the current state pretty much matches my idea and maybe
>> > > others will agree that your proposal is better. Thus, it's better to
>> > > show this to the Git community at large. :-)
>> >
>> > FWIW, I like it. I like both the better font and whitespace layout and
>> > the 3-color-spot-merge-to-white. As Petr says, we have had the
>> > (apologies, but to me) ugly logo for a while, so it is widely used,
>> > and perhaps it has even grown on people.
>> >
>> > BazaarNG managed to grab the best concept logo of the lot, IMHO, with
>> > the 'merge' roadsign.
>> >
>> > > If you think you have a cooler logo, that's fine too, but then it's
>> > > again better to present it explicitly, I believe.
>> >
>> > Can we separate the 2 things? The better fonts and layout look like a win to
>> > me.
>> >
>> > WRT the logo, the current one is not a particularly strong image, and
>> > we haven't spent millions in plastering it over magazines or anything.
>> > So a good new logo would be something to take on.
>>
>> I like that new logo (plusminus G), too, it's very descriptive. I just want to
>> raise one question which I can't answer myself:
>>
>> Are there any potential issues with the Helvetica license?
>>
>> In any case it may be safer do redo it with a GPL sans serif font. If one
>> wants to keep the association of the shape of "G" with a circular arrow then
>> FreeSans and Nimbus Sans L seem to be the only options.
>>
>> Alternatively, it may be easier to redo it in plain PS. I'll attach 2 KISS
>> variants. 1.5k for the eps, 3 colors only.
>
> You could have spared yourself the trouble:
>
> http://repo.or.cz/w/msysgit.git?a=blob_plain;f=share/resources/gitlogo.svg;h=c0d67e70ab31394f0635c141998e512437a138b4;hb=HEAD