mirror of
https://github.com/semver/semver.git
synced 2026-07-11 04:52:47 -05:00
[GH-ISSUE #171] New logo election #2829
No Assignees
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: github-starred/semver#2829
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @olivierlacan on GitHub (Jan 8, 2014).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/semver/semver/issues/171
Originally assigned to: @alexandrtovmach on GitHub.
@Tieske suggested that in a Shields issue and I think it's a very good point.
While we don't use brands for Shields badges (text only) I can point to Dustin Curtis' Markdown Mark as a perfect example of a simple brand that made it much easier to succinctly refer to Markdown.
UPD: Scroll to the latest messages to vote for a new logo!
@aaronmallen commented on GitHub (Feb 12, 2014):
@olivierlacan to what end though? To me badges has always meant some form of certification like in the old days when you ran your CSS through a validator and WS3 gave you a little badge to put in the footer of your web page. But to my knowledge there is currently no way of validating that you are in fact correctly following the semver standard.
@maglnet commented on GitHub (May 29, 2014):
I like this idea.
This could be helpful to show Users of your library / application that you know about semver and you (the lib author) are heavily trying to follow this versioning standard.
Of course the user won't have any guarantee that a minor version change won't break BC, but the user knows, that an author is trying to do his best to not break BC when raising the minor version.
So one can see it as an author's commitment: "I'll give my best to follow semver" :)
@crazedsanity commented on GitHub (May 29, 2014):
@aaronmallen I don't think this is really about getting "certified" as being compliant, more just a way of saying, "hey I'm trying." And having a recognizable logo (versus writing it out or adding a cryptic
sv2.0.0somewhere) is really beneficial. It would help spread the word about SemVer and about versioning in general.@olivierlacan commented on GitHub (May 29, 2014):
@aaronmallen You're confusing metadata with flair. The effect and impetus on some short-sighted maintainers may be flair, the gain for everyone is metadata. It's extremely important to offer good information about an open source project to help its users assess how viable it is and if they should (or should not) depend on it.
I present http://shields.io/ as evidence of this.
@aaronmallen commented on GitHub (Nov 13, 2014):
@olivierlacan +1 I can get behind that idea.
@Anahkiasen commented on GitHub (Dec 16, 2014):
👍 Any news on this?
@olivierlacan commented on GitHub (Dec 19, 2014):
I made some logo doodles the other day. Put out a tweet to try to attract a designer too.
@FichteFoll commented on GitHub (Dec 19, 2014):
Inspired by your concepts: xsemxverx,
semver~@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Dec 5, 2017):
@olivierlacan
This is an interesting idea, but it seems more like something needed in GitHub than in SemVer itself. Am I missing something?
One idea I've been pondering is exactly how can we express classification data for version strings (version meta). It's not something that SemVer should drive, but maybe something that it would be an early adopter of, once a workable standard was published. It wouldn't be written into the standard, but the release versions of SemVer would use it to refer to it's own data. This might be as simple as a prefix or postfix tag referencing some kind of human and machine readable schema indicating the policies applied to generate the version number. It could start with whether it's a marketing, package, hardware/software/human interface, or a relationship expression and include definitions for all of the fields.
See also, #174.
@JimiC commented on GitHub (Feb 19, 2018):
My proposal for a logo.
Letters stand for:
SV: Semantic VersioningM: Majorm: minorP: PatchColoring may vary.
@JimiC commented on GitHub (Feb 19, 2018):
Alternative versions.
v1
v2
@Offirmo commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2019):
A logo would indeed be nice. How about this one?
Rationale:
The elements were hand-placed to optimize volume harmony, i.e. semver is intentionally not perfectly centered.
Public domain, feel free to iterate as will.
@grv87 commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2019):
If a project uses semver logo, it would be better if the link on the logo leads to their description of public API (or what they consider breaking changes).
I agree with @jwdonahue that the logo is not the part of semver per se.
But if we can make logo valuable (not just nice image) then the logo could make its way to the FAQ.
@Offirmo commented on GitHub (Apr 1, 2019):
Slightly improved version:
(public domain, reuse/iterate at will)
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Jun 10, 2020):
Thanks everyone for your effort, it's really great idea. Do you have any consensus about it?
Few personal doubts:
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2020):
Hello guys!
I hope you're still interested in making logo for SemVer. I created open and editable Figma document, so anyone can share his idea. To contribute or share your logo please create a new page with your name (or nickname):
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Jun 18, 2020):
Plan:
P.S. Figma preferred just because it's possible to edit designs in browser, but it's not requirement
@maxhaz commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2020):
I'd like to propose something slightly different.
(the color variations follow the theme of the current site and the one being updated /semver/semver.org#256).
The idea here is to allow the use of the logo by APIs and software that follow semantic versioning guidelines.
See the examples below.
@JimiC commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2020):
@maxhaz I really really like the logo. To the point and usable in GUI's too. Nice. 👍
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2020):
@maxhaz Would you add your logo ideas to Figma?
@maxhaz commented on GitHub (Jul 10, 2020):
@alexandrtovmach Sure. Let me see how to do that.
@maxhaz commented on GitHub (Aug 3, 2020):
@JimiC Thank you!
@alexandrtovmach I just added the logo to Figma. I can edit upon request. Glad to help.
@Pablo-No commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):
How can we vote?
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):
@Pablo-No
I'm busy now, will provide more details soon in August
@JimiC commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2020):
@alexandrtovmach Ehmmm it IS August.
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2020):
I know, thanks for a reminder, but 31 Aug, it's still August 😄
Sorry for the delay I was busy with other stuff, and haven't enough time 🤷
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2020):
Thanks everyone for proposed designs, and now we'll start the election!
How to vote?
Results?
You can vote until September 30, 2020. Then all votes will be count, and results will be announced here. Later we need to agreed new logo with core maintainers, and if everything okay we'll add logo to the website, GitHub org etc.
Hope it's clear and open, feel free to ask if you have any questions
@JimiC commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2020):
My vote to
maxhaz.@Tieske commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2020):
maxhazas well@KeithBush commented on GitHub (Aug 31, 2020):
Another one for @maxhaz
@Pablo-No commented on GitHub (Sep 7, 2020):
I vote to maxhaz.
@DNA commented on GitHub (Sep 11, 2020):
@maxhaz! 👍🏻
@klehelley commented on GitHub (Sep 11, 2020):
I vote for maxhaz too. 😁
@earnal commented on GitHub (Sep 16, 2020):
I vote @maxhaz !
@Offirmo commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2020):
@maxhaz your logo is very nice but I find it a bit generic. I wish we would see something "semver-ish" in the logo. Maybe dot separators? The "tick" ✔️ design also makes it look like a Continuous Integration badge IMO.
Just my 2 cents, the logo is great and can always be improved in the future!
@maxhaz commented on GitHub (Sep 17, 2020):
@Offirmo great comments, thank you. I hold them back for possible edit.
If you have CI badges in mind, that would be awesome.
I would say that the simple, "tick"-ish design is no coincidence 😃
@Pablo-No commented on GitHub (Oct 9, 2020):
First of all congratulations @maxhaz for winning, I think everyone has voted you.
The election has ended, how is the process of changing logo?
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Oct 13, 2020):
Thanks to everyone for voting, and congratulations to @maxhaz 🎉 🎉 🎉
In case that's community driven repository, I decided to add this logo to README files for both of our repo. For now, without any "official" status or something else:
I'll create a PR with summary of this logo creation process, and ping all core contributors for some approval (but no guarantee to get some answer 🙃). With this PR I'll also add "official" note and references to logo sources and probably badges (not sure about the second one)
@alexandrtovmach commented on GitHub (Oct 13, 2020):
Thanks everyone for join and be active community 👍
Closing this issue as solved