-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 371
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feedback: UI 💬 #468
Comments
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
|
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
I believe WCAG compatibility is pretty important, at least AA grade. A lot of proffesianal interfaces developers (web/mobile) might use this CI, it is great! But a lot of us know WCAG requirments wery well (current issues in Woodpecker are notacible by human eye), so when we see Woodpecker's "gray on gray" (see this issue #721 ) it is kinda looks like, you know, ummm, a little bit "rookie designer mistake". This is absolutely OK, we all passed these steps, just sharing info how to improve and look more professional. |
Since my comment has been hidden while my idea isn't fixed, I'll just comment again: |
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
I'd like to see this "Avenir" custom font removed and instead a standard system font stack to be used. Benefits are a consistent experience across multiple apps that also use system font stack, as well as faster load times and no flash of wrong fonts. See here for an example. |
This seems like the place to plop UI feedback? I've just started using Woodpecker and I'm sorry to say that the dark mode contrast is atrocious. Let alone WCAG AAA, this fails WCAG AA standards of accessibility. I recommend https://accessible-colors.com/ for checking that there's sufficient contrast between foreground and background colours. Here's what Copying Gitea's default foreground On a more stylistic note, I don't think the dark borders do the design any favours either. Here's a lighter version: There are other improvements that can be made, but this would be a good starting point I think 🙂. |
Actually, on this topic, how would the project feel about taking heavy inspiration from Gitea's default theme? |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Agree about minimalizm of colors in rows |
Woodpecker is already roughly similar to Gitea in design (e.g. the background colour is an exact match). For ease of use and accessibility having a clear design is important, and simply put it's much easier to use an existing project as a reference than coming up with something good from scratch. I know I've only just started looking at this project, but perhaps a good avenue for initially improving the design/styling would be to take heavy inspiration from Gitea's default theme? In the slightly longer term, it would also be neat for Woodpecker to accept custom themes as Gitea does. That would make it easier to gradually develop a distinct visual identity (should the project want that) in parallel to a well-tested style and then switch it as the default once it's reached a sufficient level of refinement. |
I don't think we (the maintainers) have any disadvantages with custom themes (at least I don't have any...), so feel free to open an issue :) |
Cool, I'll see about doing so then. One quick question, if I want to try playing around with the styling myself is there some main CSS file like https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/main/web_src/less/themes/theme-arc-green.less that I could try tweaking? |
Not really. We're using https://windicss.org as CSS framework, and there's https://github.com/woodpecker-ci/woodpecker/blob/master/web/src/style.css, but I'd recommend you looking at WindiCSS. |
This comment was marked as duplicate.
This comment was marked as duplicate.
I would say they should, you can target PRs to different branches |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
Next Round: #1314 open comments will be copied ... |
for contrast related stuff ( accessibility ) here is now: #1315 |
Summary of UI issues and smaller changes (based on new UI from #245) which can be posted as comments. For complex improvements please open a separate issue.
UI improvements
ref: refs/pull/xxx/merge
/<user-or-group-name>
to view all enabled woodpecker repos of a user / groupUI bugs
Next Round: #1314
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: