On 11.04.2014, at 15:29, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Max Horn wrote: >> As for the logo, I think it's nice and simple, > > You don't think red represent an oldness in Git? Whereas green > represents progress? No, I don't think that. Perhaps you think that, but if that is the case, it is based on your own sociocultural background. Hey, and let's not forget that supposedly 8% or so of all males are red-green blind... ;-) > >> and based on experience I think that for every logo you'll find people >> who object to it. > > So we should just accept any logo without thinking about it? No. You (well, everybody) should just take a deep breath, step back, and ask yourself "Does this really matter that much to me and the rest of the world? Is it worth keeping up another long drawn discussion? Is there perhaps a chance for a compromise?" Of course it is completely up to each individual to decide this! Power to you! In the meantime, I'll watch from the sidelines, eat my popcorn, enjoy the show, and keep on not using a git logo for anything, indefinitely :-). >> E.g. the red color of the log on git-scm.com looks great to me, while >> I dislike e.g. the color variation Felipe is using. > > If you don't like my variation that doesn't mean we should accept the > red one; Of course! That's why I marked it as only being an example. > there are many shades of green to begin with. Indeed. And many shades of red, blue, etc., and let's not forget about stripes, dots, and other patterns. So many possibilities! Oh, and can I get mine with ponies? :-) > > Also, there's more than the color to think about; look at the order of > the pictured commits; they don't make any sense. I disagree. And I think you again confuse your personal sociocultural conditioning with an universal truth. In closing, let's not forget that for some things, there just is no "correct" solution, and I think the choice of a logo is one of these cases. Cheers, Max
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
