From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mathieu Lirzin Subject: bug#25205: Guix package is using the GuixSD logo instead of the Guix logo Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 10:48:15 +0100 Message-ID: <874m24mcgw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <001ff235e0edbcb0f5a6fa69356555c9@openmailbox.org> <87wpf1ayro.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg187v6t.fsf@gnu.org> <87lgvgtl23.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49764) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHp8R-00061y-Le for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 04:49:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHp8Q-0006kx-OX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 04:49:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:56429) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cHp8Q-0006km-Kl for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 04:49:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cHp8Q-00083R-C8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 04:49:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87lgvgtl23.fsf@gmail.com> (Chris Marusich's message of "Thu, 15 Dec 2016 23:00:52 -0800") List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Chris Marusich Cc: Luis Felipe =?UTF-8?Q?L=C3=B3pez?= Acevedo , 25205@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Chris, Chris Marusich writes: > Mathieu Lirzin writes: > >>> However, I would argue that the original Guix logotype is mostly >>> superseded by the other one. I=E2=80=99ve come to the conclusion that = it=E2=80=99s >>> confusion to have two logos, and that the GuixSD one is cute anyway. >>> :-) >> >> As long as Guix and GuixSD are not synonymous, I would argue that mixing >> the two logos increases confusion, whether it looks pretty or not. >> Especially since the logos include their name. >> >> >> What do people think? > > Please understand that this is just my own opinion. > > I think branding matters. And I think using one icon for the "Guix" and > "GuixSD" logos is better branding than two very different-looking icons. > Having two icons does not make the difference clearer. If anything, I > feel that it is MORE confusing because it fails to emphasize the common > component: Guix. I would not say that having different icons is confusing, however I agree that having one icon can help to visually see how they relate to each other. > Consider Nix. They use only one icon [1] on the websites for Nix [2] > and NixOS [3]. When you see it, you know the brand is Nix. Nix and > NixOS are closely related to one another, so it's natural to share the > icon. What's the difference? A logo won't tell you; you need to read > the manual to learn that. But you know it's Nix, regardless of how it's > being used. > > I think GNU Guix should use one logo to strengthen its branding. The > golden GNU [4] is better than the other one [5], so that's what I'd use. > >> If the choice of using GuixSD logo when designing Guix is about >> esthetics, maybe we could use the same symbol for both logos. Maybe >> with a slightly different color that would help distinguish them? > > Since the words "Guix" and "GuixSD" are already different, I don't think > they need to come in a different color. I do like the off-color "SD" in > the "GuixSD" logo, though, since it emphasizes that it's still Guix. That would definetely match what the Nix project is doing. While IMO Nix is not necessarily a model to follow, this would definitely be better than what is currently done for Guix/GuixSD "branding". Thanks, --=20 Mathieu Lirzin