Apply the "Contribute" page design to the "About" page #1099
Labels
No Label
bug
build
cgi Scripting
design
disruptive
documentation
duplicate
easy
feature-request
help wanted
javascript
priority/low
question
system-hackers
tagging
text
translations
wait/bugfix
wait/inprogress
wait/misc
wait/proofread
wontfix
xsl
No Milestone
No Assignees
5 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: FSFE/fsfe-website#1099
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
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?
This issue is about aligning the new “Contribute” design to the “About” page.
Original issue #705
I'll have a go on that one.
Here is a draft of the "About" page. I hope the icons are suitable, otherwise i would create some new ones.
Thank you, this looks very nice!
I'd have a preference of not using the same icon for different pages. For example, it is absolutely reasonable that the link to the "press" page has the same icon on the "About" and "Contribute" pages. On the other hand, for example using the same icon for "events" on the "Contribute" page and for "people" on the "About" page might make people think "I've already seen the content behind that icon".
Ironically I think the icon with the three heads is actually better suited for the "people" page, so we might rather want to create a new icon for the events page :-)
If you want to create new icons, please take care to use the same colors as the existing ones, so all the icons share the look and feel. However, all existing icons were made by the same volunteer, and I guess we could ask him to create some more if we want.
Thanks to all of you who already worked on this issue. I would suggest that before we create the icons we first decide what should be written on the about page. See the issue 1357 which also refers back here.
I think this issue was resolved in the mean time, or is there still something to be done?
The #705 and the other follow-ups (#1098 and #1100) have already been closed.