search

pop-os / icon-theme

System76 Pop icon theme for Linux
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International
203 stars 27 forks source link

Upstream application icons and branding should be respected #19

Closed isantop closed 5 years ago

isantop commented 7 years ago

From @chergert on September 29, 2017 10:31

Issue/Bug Description

The pop-icon-theme is overriding the branding of Builder. Our application icon is our branding and having it overridden by default is not helpful to us.

Steps to reproduce (if you know)

Install Builder from apt or via Flatpak.

Expected behaviour

Application developers icons and branding are respected.

Other Notes

I understand Pop!_OS might have a desire for a unified style on the OS that is shipped. But consider third-party application authors and how their brand is equally important to them.

Imagine shipping an app in the Android store and it having different branding on Sony phones.

You might consider breaking up the icon theme into tiers with a core set of icons for applications shipped as part of the OS and an additional package users can install to "override all my applications to look like my OS instead of as the authors intended".

Copied from original issue: pop-os/iso#103

isantop commented 7 years ago

From @jackpot51 on September 29, 2017 14:33

Thanks for reporting this. We will discuss your suggestion of moving application icons to a separate package, thus using the default icon for most applications.

brs17 commented 6 years ago

We want to maintain a consistent user experience and feel that the icon-theme helps in that regard.

snwh commented 6 years ago

FWIW, a consistent specific look and feel for Pop!_OS can be achieved without a total-coverage icon theme.

A solution would be to strip all icons that impact third-party applications from the theme leaving what constitutes a "core" icon set behind–this would leave something like all folders and system icons in place.

An "extension" of the icon theme could then be provided that users can optionally install which would include all these third-party icons. This extension would be a user-level modification and not constitute an infringement of third-party brands at the vendor-level.

jackpot51 commented 6 years ago

@brs17 we did not make a final decision on this, I am reopening

jackpot51 commented 6 years ago

@chergert I am working on this now

jackpot51 commented 6 years ago

I have a PR, #33, that addresses the GNOME Builder icon by blacklisting it from the installed by default package. We will need to create either a whitelist of application icons we want to include, or update this blacklist of applications we do not want to include.

aral commented 6 years ago

I was just about to open an issue about this as the Builder icon is not consistent with the rest of the icons. It’s an eye sore next to the rest of the flat icons. Please reconsider blacklisting it.

jackpot51 commented 6 years ago

@aral install the pop-icon-theme-extra package

aral commented 6 years ago

@jackpot51 Thanks, I can easily do that. My point was about the overall consistency of the OS. People shouldn’t have to install a separate package to get consistency. (You’ve done an amazing job of crafting a consistent OS out of so many moving parts; it’s just sad to see such a simple thing break that consistency.)

chergert commented 6 years ago

@aral As the upstream author of Builder, I don't want my applications branding overridden by default. I want all of the Builder materials and web properties to match so people know things are correct as they move between applications and external product materials.

It's very much fine for users to change things if they wish, because they are aware of the difference.