App icon refresh?

[bertob]

Bug Description

Hi, I just looked at this app from the Flathub metadata review side, and wanted to reach out since the app is now verified. We'll soon roll out curated banners on the Flathub home page and would love to feature Mixxx as part of that, but it doesn't quite meet all the metadata guidelines yet.

In addition to the screenshot size being too large (which should be easy to fix), the major issue with this app's listing is the mid-2000s Tango icon style, which looks a bit dated nowadays. Would you be interested in help with modernizing it a bit?

Version

2.4.0 from Flathub

OS

Fedora 39

[ronso0]

is the mid-2000s Tango icon style, which looks a bit dated nowadays

Would you mind being a bit more specific? How is the style of a (not default) theme relevant (major issue?) for listing an app? How do you feel about Shade :p

[ronso0]

or are you referring to blurred / pixelated icons when using a scale factor != 1.0?

[jimmac]

The style of the icon follows the Tango guidelines that were set in place a good decade ago. The nominal size was 48x48px and the contrast against any background was guaranteed by using two strokes (darker outer) and inner "highlight" one. The app icon these days is presented at a much bigger size, making those strokes pretty giant and changing the overall feel of the icon.

I think an update of the style is due, as the icon looks out of place not only on free desktop environments, but on all platforms Mixxx ships on. I think the crossfader metaphor is sound and it would be great to keep it, but follow a more contemporary style (In key elements not too far off from KDE).

[ronso0]

Ah, okay, it's about the Mixxx icon, nit the icons of the Tango skin 😄

[bertob]

Here's a quick first attempt at converting the existing icon to a more modern style:

[Holzhaus]

Wow, looks nice. Could you upload the SVG, so that we can play around with it? I'd love to see how it looks with a darker surface under the crossfader.

[ronso0]

yeah, this is indeed an improvement! jup, the notch could be darker.

[djantti]

This is really good! I like that it clearly resembles (same perspective and similar colors) the classic Mixxx logo. Like others have mentioned it could maybe use a tad more contrast, but it's super nice already. Love it!

[ywwg]

I like it! I was just thinking that the icon was looking out of date, so the timing of this discussion is perfect. I am also tempted to see what a totally different modernized icon would look like. The colors don't really match how the application itself looks -- it's a dark-mode app, but the icon light-colored. I am happy to merge this new icon as-is, but if people want to get creative and brainstorm a totally new direction, I'd love to see it!

[ywwg]

(I realize I am tempting the bike-shed monster haha)

[ronso0]

Keep in mind that (Linux) icon themes do override this, so I'm not sure if developing a darkish icon is really worth the effort. https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/pull/12424#issuecomment-1855519113

[fwcd]

If we update the icon, keep in mind that we also need a rectangular version for macOS/iOS:

• https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/blob/main/res/images/icons/scalable/apps/mixxx_macos.svg
• https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/blob/main/res/images/icons/scalable/apps/mixxx_ios.svg

[Be-ing]

I think it's awfully inappropriate for Flathub to try to dictate aesthetic choices. A submission to Flathub is not an invitation for design critique. I for one don't appreciate people who have had zero involvement with Mixxx coming in and saying we should redesign the icon because of arbitrary reasons you made up. "Looks a bit dated" is irrelevant. "Looks out of place not only on free desktop environments" is subjective, and I disagree: It looks fine; the only problem is that you think there is a problem and you've come here to tell us.

I don't like the designs you've proposed, and that's just as valid a reason as any you've put forward. I don't like it, and I don't have to justify why.

I'm not necessarily opposed to changing the Mixxx icon, but I am opposed to some external entity trying to dictate that must be done. If you don't want to feature Mixxx in a curated banner on Flathub over something as petty as "I don't like the look of the icon", then so be it. Mixxx doesn't play for exposure. I feel that's pretty disrespectful to the work that's gone into, you know, making the application do what it does. I also feel it's disrespectful to the work I did to get Mixxx working in a Flatpak to say "oh, but I don't like the icon, you have to change it before you meet Our Guidelines".

[Holzhaus]

@Be-ing i disagree with your assessment of the situation, at least it does not match my perception.

@bertob stated icon looks dated and asked if we'd be interested in help with modernizing it a bit. This alone would have already sufficed to convince me, because the icon indeed has this GNOME 2.x look and it's nice that he offered help to improve it. If the redesign also helps to increase our chances to get featured on flathub, that's a nice side effect but hardly carries enough weight to let Flathub "try to dictate aesthetic choices".

A submission to Flathub is not an invitation for design critique. I for one don't appreciate people who have had zero involvement with Mixxx coming in and saying we should redesign the icon because of arbitrary reasons you made up.

We have people coming into our bug tracker all the time asking for some feature, redesign or change. And this is generally fine IMHO. I don't think you have to "earn" the right to make a suggestion and open a bug report, especially when you also offer help fixing it.

[djantti]

I agree with what @Holzhaus said. If previous involvement was required for making a contribution, then would any of us be here? IMHO all contributions that improve a project - be it code, design, translations or documentation - should be greeted with open arms.

I think @bertob has done a great job and this refreshed icon has many redeeming qualities over the current one.

• Simpler, modern design
• Realistic perspective
• Less hard outlines
• Natural gradients and lighting
• Scales wonderfully
• Works great with dark and light backgrounds
• Pays homage to the current icon

And I bet it's going to get even better with some refinement. So please do keep working on this.

[Be-ing]

I disagree that the icon "looks dated", or that if it did, that would matter at all. I don't think chasing fashion trends is a good reason to change established, recognizable branding.

I don't appreciate @bertob's presence here at all and I don't perceive it as helping.

I don't think you have to "earn" the right to make a suggestion and open a bug report

No, you don't have to earn that right, but when you come in as an outsider and say "you have to do this to meet guidelines I made up", you've created a different situation.

[fwcd]

I don't think chasing fashion trends is a good reason to change established, recognizable branding.

Well, if the rest of the world changes, not adapting will necessarily mean that we'll look dated at some point (without judging whether that's good or bad). I would argue that @bertob and @jimmac have made very reasonable attempts at preserving the look and feel of our icon while moving it more in line with a more modern style. They are actively contributing towards finding a solution that fits in, which I think is something we should highly appreciate.

No, you don't have to earn that right, but when you come in as an outsider and say "you have to do this to meet guidelines I made up", it's a different situation.

They are certainly not the only ones doing that:

• https://developer.gnome.org/hig/guidelines/app-icons.html
• https://develop.kde.org/hig/style/icons/colorful/application/
• https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/app-icons#macOS
• https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/apps/design/style/iconography/app-icon-design

[Be-ing]

They are certainly not the only ones doing that:

Those guidelines apply to their own projects and that's fine. Imposing them on unrelated projects is inappropriate.

[fwcd]

I'm not sure I agree, this is precisely what these guidelines are intended for, providing a style guide for apps on their platform (Linux, macOS and Windows), which are also the platforms we target.

Since these style guides are pretty similar in the design language they encourage, being roughly centered around the flat design that has been widely adopted across ecosystems for the past decade, I'm hopeful that we are able to come up with something that conforms to all of them (IMO the suggestions in this thread come pretty close).

[mxmilkiib]

New icon n style guide; cool, sure, fine.

Requiring that as a barrier to promotion; to frame it in a not-just-Mixxx way: it feels like the Flatpak world will have a (needless on a practical level) filter for all GUI applications, i.e., if a fairly stable and handy app that doesn't see much development but has worth and can readily be packaged as a Flatpak, it still needs a fresh icon to get deigned to be given the opportunity to see that extra boost and respect and attention that living on the front page of the main promotion portal for a time provides, however long a time goes by? (Through a style guide, darkly.)

Edit: doing the work at the Flatpak end to make and use a custom icon, like a toolkit theme, for promotion, then submitting it as a proposal to Mixxx for a possibly more universal use, to maybe tweaked a bit more or used as prime inspiration if things go well, that would feel the right order things should happen in, imho anyway

[bragefuglseth]

doing the work at the Flatpak end to make and use a custom icon, like a toolkit theme, for promotion, then submitting it as a proposal to Mixxx for a possibly more universal use

Changing the visual identity of an app behind its back, and prominently displaying that, is something I would consider way more disrespectful than what has been done here. The final decision on how the app should be presented to the world should made by its contributors. They can decide if following the Flathub guidelines (and thus qualifying for being featured) matters enough to make any changes or not, and Flathub will respect that decision no matter what it ends up being 🙂

[mxmilkiib]

And not promote the app. It's a very Apple feeling approach, not entirely in the spirit of free software. But Flatpak should do Flatpak, that's not my world.

[Be-ing]

I put Mixxx on Flathub to make it easy for users on any Linux distro to install it and keep it updated. That's it. Flathub appointing itself to a role of gatekeeping design is uncalled for.

[razzeee]

And not promote the app. It's a very Apple feeling approach, not entirely in the spirit of free software. But Flatpak should do Flatpak, that's not my world.

Don't conflate flatpak with flathub.

In general the index space (especially above the fold) on flathub.org is a scarce resource and showing apps that put the best foot of the ecosystem forth is just a no brainer.

[bragefuglseth]

I can understand how this issue might have come off as pushy or condescending towards the Mixxx community, and seemed like a hostile attempt to override the contributors solely for the sake of how the app looks on Flathub. If that was the case, however, what @mxmilkiib suggested would probably have been done instead, and that's not happening. That would have been incredibly disrespectful towards the community. :sweat_smile: As stated, the final decision on this is to be made by the contributors, and it has no impact on the mere availability of the app on Flathub whatsoever.

(As a sidenote, you might be interested in knowing that @jimmac, who drafted the new icon suggestion further up in this thread, is one of the co-creators of Tango, the style used by the current Mixxx app icon! How the tables have turned since back then :slightly_smiling_face:)

The current atmosphere of this conversation makes me think that this issue should be closed for now. There's nothing keeping Mixxx from simply existing on Flathub in its current state, and while I'd personally love to discuss this more because I like app icons, I fear that continuing this right now will just be draining for everybody who participates. We could always pick up the thread on this later, should there ever be interest among the people who can decide on this.

[Be-ing]

The style of the icon follows the Tango guidelines that were set in place a good decade ago.

FWIW, that may be a coincidence. I don't know whether or not the present icon was designed with any intention of following the Tango guidelines.

[fwcd]

I don't know whether or not the present icon was designed with any intention of following the Tango guidelines.

Interestingly, that seems to be the case: https://github.com/mixxxdj/mixxx/commit/c3deb1678c72a4db66944e27b8a0bf2f8dfa4af4

[djantti]

I did a ton of work updating the Mixxx Flathub flatpak to version 2.4 and I'm super sad how this discussion is progressing. I really thought a professionally designed replacement icon for an aging one would be a good thing and greeted with a flood of heart emojis. This is very draining indeed. :disappointed:

[fwcd]

I guess this was the inevitable bikeshedding part. Maybe @bragefuglseth's suggestion to give this discussion some rest wouldn't be the worst idea. From what I've understood, no one is truly opposed to changing the icon, so I'm optimistic that we can revisit this and eventually get a consensus.

[Be-ing]

This could have, and still could, go very differently if you stepped down from your role of self-appointed gatekeeper of the design of all Linux applications' icons. If you said "hey, we're some designers who want to help application developers improve their icons, would you like some suggestions?" or "we're going to feature Mixxx in a banner on Flathub, would you like suggestions for the icon before we do that?" with no strings attached, those would be received much better.

To be explicitly clear what that means, that means removing this section from the Flathub documentation and the corresponding check in the "App Listing Quality".

[ywwg]

Because this discussion has gotten contentious, the core team is going to engage its decision process to resolve the dispute. In order to give feelings a chance to settle down, please do not continue the conversation for now. I am going to temporarily lock the conversation, but we will reopen it once the process has reached a conclusion, probably in about a week.

First, the core team are going to hold a vote on whether we want to up the app icon. Second, if we do decide to change it, we will decide on a process to pick a new icon, whether that's by an open submission + voting process or some other mechanism. That will provide a predictable path towards making this important change in a way that will reflect the consensus of the project.