Developing the Amber layout form the mockups; Improving the fedoraproject frame; How to proceed?

[Robin Norwood]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:24:06 +0200
Mark <markg85 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello all,

Hi Mark!

> Recently i've spoken with Robin Norwood about the Amber mockups and
> volunteered to make the mockups work in html+css and perhaps even some
> javascript.
> I did make a head start with the development but soon discovered that
> i actually needed to tell it here first so that i can get some
> feedback on how to proceed in this.
> My intention is (as said) to make the mockups in html and let amber
> use it. The other part is the frame of the mockups which is supposed
> to be the default for all of the fedora sites. All those sites already
> look like the mockup but can use some more attention to let the left
> menu look like it and perhaps the bottom (didn't really compare the
> 2).
> 
> It seems obvious for me that i need to take the current css from
> fedoraproject, adjust it to the mockup style and post it here so it
> can be used and integrated in fedoraproject sites.
> But how do you think about it? your opinion on how to proceed with
> this would be welcome.

This is one big concern I have - specifically, what's the timeframe for
developing and deploying the new fedora style, and how will that mesh
with the planned schedule of Amber?  The goal for amber is to release
by F10's release date (Currently October 28).

Also, a technical detail is that amber-specific CSS should probably live
in a different file than the main fedora CSS.  But that should be
fairly easy to accomplish when the design is more complete.

> About the name : "Amber"
> I talked to Norwood about this as well and told him that i actually
> liked (the codename) Amber way more then the intended name:
> "Application install".. Norwood told me that he is fine with both
> names and i personally would like to see Amber as the final name.
> 
> So i would like to ask the rest what they think is better:
> - Amber
> - Application Install

Er, actually, 'Fedora Applications' is the intended name.
> 
> Cast your votes.
> (from me it's +1 for Amber)

I'll abstain.  I can see positives and negatives for both options.  My
current feeling is to call the instance of the application for Fedora
'Fedora Applications', because it matches the naming/branding scheme of
several other pieces, and it's an easy, descriptive name.  'Amber'
would remain the name of the project and software running the web
application.

-RN

-- 
Robin Norwood
Red Hat, Inc.

"The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone."
-Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching