search

backdrop / backdrop-issues

Issue tracker for Backdrop core.
144 stars 39 forks source link

Administration UI elements that need a design review #139

Open quicksketch opened 10 years ago

quicksketch commented 10 years ago

r5yn in the Drupal queue has done some amazing work on making a new consistent UI for the Seven theme. We should work on doing the same work for Backdrop CMS.

We should use the list below as list of things we should evaluate. Do they need a design update? If so, let's incorporate those changes into our styleguide, and go from there.

These issues collected from d.o The main D8 issue is at: https://drupal.org/node/1986434

jenlampton commented 9 years ago

This issue is now just a list of things we should review and see if we need a change. @dariusgarza once you review the element go ahead and check the box. Don't worry about the #xx since we may not have individual issues for all these things in Backdrop, they may all end up getting all fixed at once :)

dariusgarza commented 9 years ago

364 Icon font issue -

Just realized there's a whole thread about this in the issue.

The Free Software Foundation says that it's ok to distribute fonts with OFL license, such as font awesome alongside GPL software packages.

Here's snippet from a thread about this:

Question: 1.2 Can the fonts be included with Free/Libre and Open Source Software collections such as GNU/Linux and BSD distributions and repositories?

Answer: Yes! Fonts licensed under the OFL can be freely included alongside other software under FLOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) licenses. Since fonts are typically aggregated with, not merged into, existing software, there is little need to be concerned about incompatibility with existing software licenses. You may also repackage the fonts and the accompanying components in a .rpm or .deb package (or other similar packaging formats or installers) and include them in distribution CD/DVDs and online repositories. (Also see section 5.9 about rebuilding from source.) It is OK to distribute fonts licensed under the terms of the SIL OFL 1.1alongside a GPL licensed work. What we mean by "alongside" is that the font and the program would be considered "separate works" under the terms of the GNU GPL, because they aren't combined in any way, but simply aggregated. It is often the case that a program (such as a word processor) can make use of makes use of a particular font without the font being considered part of the Program or the font and program being considered a single combined work.

full post: https://github.com/FortAwesome/Font-Awesome/issues/1124

@quicksketch @jenlampton

dariusgarza commented 9 years ago

Seems like the only issue that's open without an #xx is the icon font one....but it's a doozy ;)

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 12:05 AM, Jen Lampton notifications@github.com wrote:

I'm stealing this issue back.... It's now just a list of things we should review and see if we need a change. @dariusgarza https://github.com/dariusgarza once you review the element go ahead and check the box. Don't worry about the #xx since we may not have issues for all these things in Backdrop, they may all end up getting all fixed at once :)

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/backdrop/backdrop-issues/issues/139#issuecomment-73470480 .

jenlampton commented 9 years ago

yeah licensing isn't an issue for backdrop, I think it's just depending on an external library that's an issue, but that's why we have the other issue to debate it. @dariusgarza can you do a quick design review of all the items in the list, and check the boxes if either 1) we've redesigned it in the new styleguide or 2) the current style is good enough as-is? If you don't know what something is or don't know where to find it add a note here and we can steer you it the right direction.

olafgrabienski commented 7 years ago

Added a link to the CKEditor skin checklist item. (https://github.com/backdrop/backdrop-issues/issues/2631)