Voting for new logo #652

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2017):

Logo by @qdbdbp https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1260#issuecomment-290051119

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2017): Logo by @qdbdbp https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1260#issuecomment-290051119 ![](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/19255071/24450561/a14d7564-147b-11e7-8ae4-10ec46479cce.jpg)

GiteaMirror commented

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2017):

Just a quick heads-up on both though... Using the Git-logo in our logo is actually not legal: https://git-scm.com/trademark ... And technically neither is using the term "Git" in the name 🙄

So before starting to use this logo, we should send an email to trademark@sfconservancy.org asking if it's okey...

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2017): Just a quick heads-up on both though... Using the Git-logo in our logo is actually **not legal**: https://git-scm.com/trademark ... And technically neither is using the term "Git" in the name 🙄 So before starting to use this logo, we should send an email to trademark@sfconservancy.org asking if it's okey...

GiteaMirror commented

@agaida commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2017):

But the SF are more or less nice people, they allowed the usage for gitolite, GitLab, but one should ask for the written permission

@agaida commented on GitHub (Apr 19, 2017): But the SF are more or less nice people, they allowed the usage for gitolite, GitLab, but one should ask for the written permission

GiteaMirror commented

@lunny commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

@strk please comment after that two vote replies. So I deleted your comment.

@lunny commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): @strk please comment after that two vote replies. So I deleted your comment.

GiteaMirror commented

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

@agaida Both of those have been Grandfathered, and none of them use the git-logo in their logo (and never have)

Also from Gitolites website: http://gitolite.com/gitolite/index.html#license

Note:
GIT is a trademark of Software Freedom Conservancy and my use of "Gitolite" is under license.

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): @agaida Both of those have been [Grandfathered](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_clause), and none of them use the git-logo in their logo (and never have) Also from Gitolites website: http://gitolite.com/gitolite/index.html#license > Note: > GIT is a trademark of Software Freedom Conservancy and **my use of "Gitolite" is under license.**

GiteaMirror commented

@andreynering commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

So, I think we will have to rewrite the tea tag to remove the Git reference. Is there any other generic symbol that refer to VCS?

@andreynering commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): So, I think we will have to rewrite the tea tag to remove the Git reference. Is there any other generic symbol that refer to VCS?

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

I would wait for the response from SF first.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): I would wait for the response from SF first.

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

I think VS Code changed git icon to this one because of license issues

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): I think VS Code changed git icon to this one because of license issues ![git](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/6573628/25228803/728aef88-25d6-11e7-83d1-c003f574d6a4.PNG)

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

because of license issues

Do you have a source for this? I think it was because they added support for other VCSs, e.g. SVN.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): > because of license issues Do you have a source for this? I think it was because they added support for other VCSs, e.g. SVN.

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

@jhasse No I have no source of this icon 😞

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): @jhasse No I have no source of this icon :disappointed:

GiteaMirror commented

@kolaente commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

@alexmironof i think he means a proof, not a source file

@kolaente commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): @alexmironof i think he means a proof, not a source file

GiteaMirror commented

@gravemalte commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

@jhasse They just improved it. No license issue.

Source: https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/issues/18675#issuecomment-289680726

@gravemalte commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): @jhasse They just improved it. No license issue. Source: https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/issues/18675#issuecomment-289680726

GiteaMirror commented

https://git-scm.com/trademark

@pgaskin commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

@bkcsoft

In addition, you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service without Conservancy's written permission. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision applies even to third-party marks that use the Marks as a syllable or as part of a portmanteau to refer to a product or service's use of Git code.

@pgaskin commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): @bkcsoft https://git-scm.com/trademark > In addition, you may not use any of the Marks as a syllable in a new word or as part of a portmanteau (e.g., "Gitalicious", "Gitpedia") used as a mark for a third-party product or service without Conservancy's written permission. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision applies even to third-party marks that use the Marks as a syllable or as part of a portmanteau to refer to a product or service's use of Git code.

GiteaMirror commented

@kolaente commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

So, we need a new name?

@kolaente commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): So, we need a new name?

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017):

So, we need a new name?

Or Conservancy's written permission.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Apr 20, 2017): > So, we need a new name? Or Conservancy's written permission.

GiteaMirror commented

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

@jhasse @geek1011 @kolaente Just to clarify, I'm not saying we should change the name. I'm just saying that we should not put the git-logo in our logo, since that would just put us more in violation with their trademark.

And the "punchline" Git with a cup of tea can still live on, even if the name might change in the future 😉

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): @jhasse @geek1011 @kolaente Just to clarify, I'm _not_ saying we should change the name. I'm just saying that we should _not_ put the git-logo in our logo, since that would just put us _more_ in violation with their trademark. And the "punchline" `Git with a cup of tea` can still live on, even if the name might change in the future 😉

GiteaMirror commented

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

Like for many things, the name is an important aspect of an application. A name definitely can influence its development and future, in some ways, practical or more subtle.

"Gitea" is a nice name, still it seems to me it does not reflect the broader and deeper aspect of what it offers.

In my humble opinion, "Gitea" is cute and entertains of course an echo of culinary culture, perhaps also hinting to its possible social nature, but it does not fully convey its potential.

I am afraid an application of a much broader nature and so promising like this is would be negatively affected by a wrong name.

Unfortunately, to some cultures, even the name gogs might have been not a good choice.

This project would deserver a name deeply connected with its nature, with a short and nice sound (although two syllables do help form a rhythm), and it should have a unique feeling, charged with newness and enthusiasm , like its vision and its community.

Please consider changing the name of gitea. This is the right time, the beginning of a new phase, when the application is allowed to unfold more of its potential. Or, at least allow for more choices to come in, so that a freer deliberation could be made by the maintainers.

In any case, thank you so much for this wonderful app. It is truly a first-class app.

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): Like for many things, the name is an important aspect of an application. A name definitely can influence its development and future, in some ways, practical or more subtle. "Gitea" is a nice name, still it seems to me it does not reflect the broader and deeper aspect of what it offers. In my humble opinion, "Gitea" is cute and entertains of course an echo of culinary culture, perhaps also hinting to its possible social nature, but it does not fully convey its potential. I am afraid an application of a much broader nature and so promising like this is would be negatively affected by a wrong name. Unfortunately, to some cultures, even the name [gogs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gog_and_Magog) might have been not a good choice. This project would deserver a name deeply connected with its nature, with a short and nice sound (although two syllables do help form a rhythm), and it should have a unique feeling, charged with newness and enthusiasm , like its vision and its community. Please consider changing the name of gitea. This is the right time, the beginning of a new phase, when the application is allowed to unfold more of its potential. Or, at least allow for more choices to come in, so that a freer deliberation could be made by the maintainers. In any case, thank you so much for this wonderful app. It is truly a first-class app.

GiteaMirror commented

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

Another way would be to just take a branch of tea leafs, but I have no idea how to make that into a nice flat icon ;D

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): Another way would be to just take a branch of tea leafs, but I have no idea how to make that into a nice flat icon ;D

GiteaMirror commented

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

@priyadarshan even now, changing the name will require a lot of work, since that would mean a lot of code changes, a new domain, moving this repo, and so on.

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): @priyadarshan even now, changing the name will require a lot of work, since that would mean a lot of code changes, a new domain, moving this repo, and so on.

GiteaMirror commented

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

A name is such a vital aspect to an application, that perhaps should be seen as a long term investment, worth the extra work. Of course, the more the wait, the more work it would require. Still, it should not be taken lightly, or hurriedly.

As per the domain name change, I pledge to donate $100 to support an eventual domain change, just let me know, in due time, where to donate.

I am just a very new, grateful user of gitea. I will be happy with whatever decision the maintainers will support.

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): A name is such a vital aspect to an application, that perhaps should be seen as a long term investment, worth the extra work. Of course, the more the wait, the more work it would require. Still, it should not be taken lightly, or hurriedly. As per the domain name change, I pledge to donate $100 to support an eventual domain change, just let me know, in due time, where to donate. I am just a very new, grateful user of gitea. I will be happy with whatever decision the maintainers will support.

GiteaMirror commented

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

I forgot the hardest part: Coming up with a good name. Anyone got any suggestions?

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): I forgot the hardest part: Coming up with a good name. Anyone got any suggestions?

GiteaMirror commented

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

Thank you for the chance. A possibility:
tigriver tig is a name for tag, and also git spelled backward. River implies the visual image of flowing together of all branches. It is a three-syllable, but seems pleasant to hear.

As far as I know, it does not seem to be used by a commercial company.

Edit: Other possibilities:

GitRiver
PanGit (pan meaning "all-inclusive")
GitGo

GitGo being my favourite.

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): Thank you for the chance. A possibility: `tigriver` tig is a name for tag, and also git spelled backward. River implies the visual image of flowing together of all branches. It is a three-syllable, but seems pleasant to hear. As far as I know, it does not seem to be used by a commercial company. Edit: Other possibilities: - `GitRiver` - `PanGit` (pan meaning "all-inclusive") - `GitGo` GitGo being my favourite.

GiteaMirror commented

@strk commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

FWIW: I like the current name of the project.

@strk commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): FWIW: I like the current name of the project.

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

I propose to write an official inquiry to trademark@sfconservancy.org
This will solve our doubts.
As for the name "Gitea" is very cool and eloquent - you can quickly remember.

@priyadarshan Git in reverse?? Poor concept.

@lcges commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): I propose to write an official inquiry to trademark@sfconservancy.org This will solve our doubts. As for the name "Gitea" is very cool and eloquent - you can quickly remember. @priyadarshan Git in reverse?? Poor concept.

GiteaMirror commented

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

Sorry you did not like the first attempt. What do you think about the others?

It seems to me my initial comment is still pertinent.

Perhaps others would like to put more ideas on the table.

Edit: After searching, it seems the name tig is already been used to denote a git tool: Tig: text-mode interface for Git

@priyadarshan commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): Sorry you did not like the first attempt. What do you think about the others? It seems to me my [initial comment](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1516#issuecomment-296088035) is still pertinent. Perhaps others would like to put more ideas on the table. Edit: After searching, it seems the name `tig` is already been used to denote a git tool: [Tig: text-mode interface for Git](https://jonas.github.io/tig/)

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

@qdbdbp How about Gitter? It contains git in its name, but I think they have no problems with licensing

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): @qdbdbp How about Gitter? It contains git in its name, but I think they have no problems with licensing

GiteaMirror commented

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017):

@alexmironof I don't think that having git in the name is necessarily a problem, there also is GIThub, GITlab, GITolite, GITbucket, and probably a lot more. They however don't use the git logo in theirs, which might be more of a problem.

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 21, 2017): @alexmironof I don't think that having git in the name is necessarily a problem, there also is GIThub, GITlab, GITolite, GITbucket, and probably a lot more. They however don't use the git logo in theirs, which might be more of a problem.

GiteaMirror commented

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 22, 2017):

I like both proposed logos so far. And those fresh color schemes! Here's another one to throw into the mix. Note the addition of the comma, too. :bowtie:

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 22, 2017): I like both proposed logos so far. And those fresh color schemes! Here's another one to throw into the mix. Note the addition of the comma, too. :bowtie: ![img_2132](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25304744/133a7c48-2733-11e7-9857-e406bed55d7c.PNG) ![img_2133](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25304745/134be6a4-2733-11e7-943c-e27f60bd1e3f.PNG)

GiteaMirror commented

@andreynering commented on GitHub (Apr 22, 2017):

@whilei I liked it. Very clean.

@andreynering commented on GitHub (Apr 22, 2017): @whilei I liked it. Very clean.

GiteaMirror commented

@ulm0 commented on GitHub (Apr 22, 2017):

@whilei wow, i love it. Awesome work.

@ulm0 commented on GitHub (Apr 22, 2017): @whilei wow, i love it. Awesome work.

GiteaMirror commented

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 23, 2017):

Thanks for the positive feedback. Here's another look at it.

Update: theoretical discussion (@jcgruenhage):

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G
and alternatively something like below would more g-ish...?

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 23, 2017): Thanks for the positive feedback. Here's another look at it. ![img_2146](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25313710/c0f7bf28-27f9-11e7-9700-5514a8a3c8bc.PNG) ![img_2144](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25313693/34fe6378-27f9-11e7-8d52-2370fd9079ab.PNG) ---- **Update**: theoretical discussion (@jcgruenhage): ![img_2150](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25316219/4348bd78-2828-11e7-8b12-4bd9b12f0b00.PNG) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G and alternatively something like below would more g-ish...? ![img_2151](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25316244/f999100a-2828-11e7-91bb-aac85d5290bd.PNG)

GiteaMirror commented

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 23, 2017):

I can't see what the last logo should be, but I kinda like it.

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Apr 23, 2017): I can't see what the last logo should be, but I kinda like it.

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017):

@whilei Very cool and nice concept.
I like the first one - it is better to name it.

@lcges commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017): @whilei Very cool and nice concept. I like the first one - it is better to name it.

GiteaMirror commented

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017):

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017): ![img_2152](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25335312/201ad1ca-28b8-11e7-9037-0cfdd9f44971.PNG)

GiteaMirror commented

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017):

@whilei commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017): ![img_2153](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/10228550/25335324/2c6f09a0-28b8-11e7-9233-94f5669e6b65.PNG)

GiteaMirror commented

@lofidevops commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017):

If the name does present a problem (which I agree is unlikely), or the project does not want to be tied only to Git, there is a lot of tea-related terminology to use as a name: camellia, kukicha, darjeeling, gaiwan, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea for more.

@lofidevops commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017): If the name does present a problem (which I agree is unlikely), or the project does not want to be tied only to Git, there is a **lot** of tea-related terminology to use as a name: *camellia*, *kukicha*, *darjeeling*, *gaiwan*, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea for more.

GiteaMirror commented

@sapk commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017):

I think we could keep gitea for name but

camellia, kukicha, darjeeling, gaiwan,

could be good names for releases

@sapk commented on GitHub (Apr 24, 2017): I think we could keep gitea for name but > camellia, kukicha, darjeeling, gaiwan, could be good names for releases

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (May 16, 2017):

There any summary of the vote?

@lcges commented on GitHub (May 16, 2017): There any summary of the vote?

GiteaMirror commented

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (May 16, 2017):

@qdbdbp (as of this writing) your logo won. Only problem is that is integrates the Git-logo which is in violation of the Git Trademark. Mind making one that does not use said logo?
was sugggested earlier as a close enough substitute 🙂

@bkcsoft commented on GitHub (May 16, 2017): @qdbdbp (as of this writing) your logo won. Only problem is that is integrates the Git-logo which is in violation of the Git Trademark. Mind making one that does not use said logo? ![](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/6573628/25228803/728aef88-25d6-11e7-83d1-c003f574d6a4.PNG) was sugggested earlier as a close enough substitute 🙂

GiteaMirror commented

@lunny commented on GitHub (May 25, 2017):

So let's move this to v1.3

@lunny commented on GitHub (May 25, 2017): So let's move this to v1.3

GiteaMirror commented

@kolaente commented on GitHub (Jun 14, 2017):

As for 3

Just a quick heads-up on both though... Using the Git-logo in our logo is actually not legal: https://git-scm.com/trademark ... And technically neither is using the term "Git" in the name 🙄

So before starting to use this logo, we should send an email to trademark@sfconservancy.org asking if it's okey...

Any news here?

@kolaente commented on GitHub (Jun 14, 2017): As for [3](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1516#issuecomment-295479783) >Just a quick heads-up on both though... Using the Git-logo in our logo is actually not legal: https://git-scm.com/trademark ... And technically neither is using the term "Git" in the name :roll_eyes: > >So before starting to use this logo, we should send an email to trademark@sfconservancy.org asking if it's okey... Any news here?

GiteaMirror commented

@mxmehl commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2017):

For such legal questions, the FSFE is offering some help for free software projects like this. The lawyers answering your request will also be able to give an estimation on whether you're safe with the trademark issue.

Write to: license-questions@lists.fsfe.org

More info: https://fsfe.org/activities/ftf/licence-questions.en.html

@mxmehl commented on GitHub (Jun 21, 2017): For such legal questions, the [FSFE](fsfe.org) is offering some help for free software projects like this. The lawyers answering your request will also be able to give an estimation on whether you're safe with the trademark issue. Write to: license-questions@lists.fsfe.org More info: https://fsfe.org/activities/ftf/licence-questions.en.html

GiteaMirror commented

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 20, 2017):

@qdbdbp could you give SVG files for logo?

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 20, 2017): @qdbdbp could you give SVG files for logo?

GiteaMirror commented

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017):

As @bkcsoft raised concern about git logo copyright I would propose this with same concept and colors as logo that won just without using git logo

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017): As @bkcsoft raised concern about git logo copyright I would propose this with same concept and colors as logo that won just without using git logo ![gitea_logo_samples](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/165205/28467969-3afa47c4-6e3a-11e7-8a21-0ba8cc38f01a.png)

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017):

Why did you do this instead of writing to trademark@sfconservancy.org?

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017): Why did you do this instead of writing to trademark@sfconservancy.org?

GiteaMirror commented

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017):

@jhasse I have created svg files for proposed one and this one, to me both ar fine :) So I will just let @go-gitea/owners to decide ;)

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017): @jhasse I have created svg files for proposed one and this one, to me both ar fine :) So I will just let @go-gitea/owners to decide ;)

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017):

I see :)

Btw: The 32px version in the new one is nice!

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017): I see :) Btw: The 32px version in the new one is nice!

GiteaMirror commented

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017):

I like it more than the old one, mostly because the angle looks more natural, and the corners are nicer.

@jcgruenhage commented on GitHub (Jul 21, 2017): I like it more than the old one, mostly because the angle looks more natural, and the corners are nicer.

GiteaMirror commented

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 22, 2017):

As requested by @lunny here are some other options for small icon:

- 👍
- 😄
- 🎉
- ❤️

Vote by respective reactions (vote with 👎 for same as large icon)

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 22, 2017): As requested by @lunny here are some other options for small icon: 1) ![small_logo_v1](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/165205/28494413-6178bd8e-6f36-11e7-883d-e19757d4620d.png) - :+1: 2) ![small_logo_v2](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/165205/28494415-6fd06ddc-6f36-11e7-85a9-a7fba7f98aee.png) - :smile: 3) ![small_logo_v3](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/165205/28494431-2388bf8c-6f37-11e7-9d6b-38f7bd9ec0af.png) - :tada: 4) ![small_logo_v4](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/165205/28494432-24e85fcc-6f37-11e7-8f36-04ccc3815178.png) - :heart: Vote by respective reactions (vote with :-1: for same as large icon)

GiteaMirror commented

@twang2218 commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

I love the @whilei 's second design: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1516#issuecomment-296441534, it's very smooth, looks special, and it also looks good in small icon. Why not include that into the vote?

@twang2218 commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): I love the @whilei 's second design: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1516#issuecomment-296441534, it's very smooth, looks special, and it also looks good in small icon. Why not include that into the vote?

GiteaMirror commented

@lunny commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

@twang2218 because @whilei 's designs are posted many days after the previous two. Except we begin a new vote, that's unfair.

@lunny commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): @twang2218 because @whilei 's designs are posted many days after the previous two. Except we begin a new vote, that's unfair.

GiteaMirror commented

@twang2218 commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

fine, but it looks real nice.

@twang2218 commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): fine, but it looks real nice.

GiteaMirror commented

@MTecknology commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

I'm a huge fan of the git tea that's sprouting from the tea seed. Not so much the letter g, but that next one is pretty slick. :)

@MTecknology commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): I'm a huge fan of the git tea that's sprouting from the tea seed. Not so much the letter g, but that next one is pretty slick. :)

GiteaMirror commented

@ulm0 commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

Ya, @whilei designs are really badass!

@ulm0 commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): Ya, @whilei designs are really badass!

GiteaMirror commented

@whilei commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

I don't mean to butt-in or cause confusion, but thought I would add a separate poll in case it may be helpful. My designs were posted 4 and 5 days (respectively) after the initial logo proposals.

logo	name
	g
	cup
	sprout

@whilei commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): I don't mean to butt-in or cause confusion, but thought I would add a separate poll in case it may be helpful. My designs were posted 4 and 5 days (respectively) after the initial logo proposals. | logo | name | | --- | --- | | ![gitea-g](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/10228550/28502083-49d53fe8-6fb0-11e7-90a6-82f7c8bee60f.png) | g | | ![gitea-cup](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/10228550/28502081-49d37e88-6fb0-11e7-92c4-559fff5907bf.png) | cup | | ![sprout](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/10228550/28502082-49d50258-6fb0-11e7-9e0f-f1cc844673c5.png) | sprout | [![](https://m131jyck4m.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/poll/01BNRDC8MJ3JWAWRV5YS07ZRK0/g)](https://m131jyck4m.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/poll/01BNRDC8MJ3JWAWRV5YS07ZRK0/g/vote) [![](https://m131jyck4m.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/poll/01BNRDC8MJ3JWAWRV5YS07ZRK0/cup)](https://m131jyck4m.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/poll/01BNRDC8MJ3JWAWRV5YS07ZRK0/cup/vote) [![](https://m131jyck4m.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/poll/01BNRDC8MJ3JWAWRV5YS07ZRK0/sprout)](https://m131jyck4m.execute-api.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/prod/poll/01BNRDC8MJ3JWAWRV5YS07ZRK0/sprout/vote)

GiteaMirror commented

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017):

@whilei but still your designs got less votes than @qdbdbp so it was decided to use it and just modify not to have copyright issues with git logo.

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2017): @whilei but still your designs got less votes than @qdbdbp so it was decided to use it and just modify not to have copyright issues with git logo.

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (Jul 24, 2017):

logo_gitea.svg.zip

@lcges commented on GitHub (Jul 24, 2017): [logo_gitea.svg.zip](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/files/1169135/logo_gitea.svg.zip)

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (Jul 25, 2017):

In my opinion, I lost the original idea of the logo that I designed.
Now the proposal @whilei seems to me more interesting, more modern.
Maybe as we work on the original colors of "Gitea" we will work out some good logotyp.

@lcges commented on GitHub (Jul 25, 2017): In my opinion, I lost the original idea of the logo that I designed. Now the proposal @whilei seems to me more interesting, more modern. Maybe as we work on the original colors of "Gitea" we will work out some good logotyp. ![gitea](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/19255071/28571554-b493476e-7143-11e7-8618-3052956b08ad.PNG)

GiteaMirror commented

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 25, 2017):

@qdbdbp @whilei design is nice but somehow I don't like shades in background

@lafriks commented on GitHub (Jul 25, 2017): @qdbdbp @whilei design is nice but somehow I don't like shades in background

GiteaMirror commented

@jonasfranz commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2017):

Which is the new logo? When we will have a decision? I think posting more logos will not make it easier to determine which logo is "the best".

@jonasfranz commented on GitHub (Jul 26, 2017): Which is the new logo? When we will have a decision? I think posting more logos will not make it easier to determine which logo is "the best".

GiteaMirror commented

@lunny commented on GitHub (Jul 27, 2017):

see #2194

@lunny commented on GitHub (Jul 27, 2017): see #2194

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

@lunny I think @whilei logos looks more modern and more professionally designed than @qdbdbp and why community doesnt choose them?

The answer is simple - 2 days delay. People opened this issue and choosed from two logos first, voted and then never opened this issue again.

I think good idea to start voting from scratch and post all logos at once so everybody have some more options to choose from

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): @lunny I think @whilei logos looks more modern and more professionally designed than @qdbdbp and why community doesnt choose them? The answer is simple - 2 days delay. People opened this issue and choosed from two logos first, voted and then never opened this issue again. I think good idea to start voting from scratch and post all logos at once so everybody have some more options to choose from

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Before this issue, there were others with lots of ideas (#1121, #1260, #1312). To open yet another one will just result in bike-shedding.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Before this issue, there were others with lots of ideas (#1121, #1260, #1312). To open yet another one will just result in bike-shedding.

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

3 issues with 6 logos, nice 🤣 Why not to gather them all in one place? And this is proof that in #1516 people just vote for 2 well known logos.

Also @qdbdbp mentioned @whilei logo is more modern and interesting.
P.S. Look carefully at Gogs logo - it is also well designed.
I dont want to hurt somebody feelings, but current logo seem like "Hello from 90's"

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): 3 issues with 6 logos, nice :rofl: Why not to gather them all in one place? And this is proof that in #1516 people just vote for 2 well known logos. Also @qdbdbp mentioned @whilei logo is more modern and interesting. P.S. Look carefully at `Gogs` logo - it is also well designed. I dont want to hurt somebody feelings, but current logo seem like "Hello from 90's"

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Also if you subtract downvotes from upvotes - the winner is @kolaente

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Also if you subtract downvotes from upvotes - the winner is @kolaente

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

At some point you'll have to settle on a logo.

And this is proof that in #1516 people just vote for 2 well known logos.

Yes, because those were the two most popular suggestions at the time.

Also if you subtract downvotes from upvotes - the winner is @kolaente

Voting is over, the current state isn't representative anymore (for example people who dislike the logo on try.gitea.io might come here and downvote it).

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): At some point you'll have to settle on a logo. > And this is proof that in #1516 people just vote for 2 well known logos. Yes, because those were the two most popular suggestions at the time. > Also if you subtract downvotes from upvotes - the winner is @kolaente Voting is over, the current state isn't representative anymore (for example people who dislike the logo on try.gitea.io might come here and downvote it).

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Voting is over, the current state isn't representative anymore (for example people who dislike the logo on try.gitea.io might come here and downvote it).

The state of downvotes was correct at the time when pull request arrived, it doesn't changed so much through time.

Millions of lemmings can't be wrong!

If you think rationally not only community votes makes good choice

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): > Voting is over, the current state isn't representative anymore (for example people who dislike the logo on try.gitea.io might come here and downvote it). The state of downvotes was correct at the time when pull request arrived, it doesn't changed so much through time. > Millions of lemmings can't be wrong! If you think rationally not only community votes makes good choice

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Also only clear thinking mades my decision to move from gogs to gitea, because it seems unmaintained, but community choose gogs(it has about 20k stars)

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Also only clear thinking mades my decision to move from gogs to gitea, because it seems unmaintained, but community choose gogs(it has about 20k stars)

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

The state of downvotes was correct at the time when pull request arrived

I didn't know that. I guess if down-votes were to be substracted from the voting, that should have been made clear in the beginning. Without explicit mentioning I wouldn't expect it.

If you think rationally not only community votes makes good choice

Yes, so?

but community choose gogs(it has about 20k stars)

Gogs was around a lot longer that's why it has more stars.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): > The state of downvotes was correct at the time when pull request arrived I didn't know that. I guess if down-votes were to be substracted from the voting, that should have been made clear in the beginning. Without explicit mentioning I wouldn't expect it. > If you think rationally not only community votes makes good choice Yes, so? > but community choose gogs(it has about 20k stars) Gogs was around a lot longer that's why it has more stars.

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

GOGS is a older project - compared to him, the new project is stupidity.
Do you think people will not go to Gitea because there is a "different" logo than Gogs?

@lcges commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): GOGS is a older project - compared to him, the new project is stupidity. Do you think people will not go to Gitea because there is a "different" logo than Gogs?

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Gogs was around a lot longer that's why it has more stars.

It has more start because of nice logo 😉

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): > Gogs was around a lot longer that's why it has more stars. It has more start because of nice logo :wink:

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

It has more start because of nice logo 😉

No, it didn't even have the current logo from the beginning.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): > It has more start because of nice logo :wink: No, it didn't even have the current logo from the beginning.

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Yes, previous logo seems more popular 😄
http://www.timqian.com/star-history/#go-gitea/gitea

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Yes, previous logo seems more popular :smile: http://www.timqian.com/star-history/#go-gitea/gitea

GiteaMirror commented

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Why do you think that? I don't see any decline of the gradient since July.

@jhasse commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Why do you think that? I don't see any decline of the gradient since July.

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

From start up it has a huge gain.

So I think we should stop flooding about personal decisions. My decision is good looking, professianally designed and modern logo

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): From start up it has a huge gain. So I think we should stop flooding about personal decisions. My decision is good looking, professianally designed and modern logo

GiteaMirror commented

@lesderid commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

@alexmironof The decision was made to use the logo with the most votes. If you think it's so bad that there needs to be a new vote, open a new issue with objective arguments against the current logo. If enough people agree with you, a new vote could be proposed, but I don't see it happening.
People chose for the current logo, and if anything is bad for brand identity, it's changing logos every few months.

@lesderid commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): @alexmironof The decision was made to use the logo with the most votes. If you think it's so bad that there needs to be a new vote, open a new issue with objective arguments against the current logo. If enough people agree with you, a new vote could be proposed, but I don't see it happening. People chose for the current logo, and if anything is bad for brand identity, it's changing logos every few months.

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

@lesderid If anythings is bad for brand identity it is only a bad brand identity position.
Like choosing not the best logo available or bad contribution model

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): @lesderid If anythings is bad for brand identity it is only a bad brand identity position. Like choosing not the best logo available or bad contribution model

GiteaMirror commented

@ptman commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Isn't it very simple to override the logo in custom/ ? Please focus your effort on getting a new release out instead of logo bikeshedding.

@ptman commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Isn't it very simple to override the logo in custom/ ? Please focus your effort on getting a new release out instead of logo bikeshedding.

GiteaMirror commented

@lcges commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Please suggest some modern logo that you think is correct.
At this time it's just trolling.
We focus on important things - the logo theme was already considered.

If you have a problem with this, maybe it's better to be with Gogs because it has a better logo.

I think Gitea is already bright years ahead of Gogs with an "ugly" logo ...

@lcges commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Please suggest some modern logo that you think is correct. At this time it's just trolling. We focus on important things - the logo theme was already considered. If you have a problem with this, maybe it's better to be with Gogs because it has a better logo. I think Gitea is already bright years ahead of Gogs with an "ugly" logo ...

GiteaMirror commented

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017):

Ive suggested it before

@kifirkin commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2017): Ive suggested it before

GiteaMirror commented