12 ms·

My girlfriend tried to design an icon for an open-source app she uses, but the experience hasn't been really great. I think the way developers in open-source pr

by pieter 16y ago

My girlfriend tried to design an icon for an open-source app she uses, but the experience hasn't been really great. I think the way developers in open-source projects communicate doesn't really work with designers. She sent the photoshop source file and a png to the mailing list, but was told to send in a patch instead, which meant she had to learn how to use git to check out the repository, add the icon to the repo, and then generate a git patch. Only after that, she was told that they couldn't use the photoshop source file because they didn't have photoshop. Finally, one of the developers imported the file into the GIMP, changed some stuff on the icon without discussion, botched the output and then added that to the project. That was enough for her to not try doing something like this again.

gidea 16y ago
This seems like one in a million. I don't think webdev's are all like that but I see your point.
Sirupsen 16y ago
Yes, version control definitely seems like one of the biggest gaps. The communication between developers and designers have to improve, and the developers will have to realize they can't ask every designer for commits, but they can probably ask them for .zip files.
- vog 16y ago
  On the other hand, maybe we should make designers want to use Git. This might be not as crazy as it sounds, as I recently learned: A few weeks ago, there was a short presentation about Git, targeted at non-programmers such as graphics and web designers. After the presentation, one of the designers (who apparently already knew about Git) stood up and criticized the presenter for not going deeper into branches and auto-branching. Of course, the presenter intentionally left that topic out, in order to not confuse all those Git newbies. However, the designer argued that this is what would make Git interesting for designers. He said that all this diff/commit/push/pull stuff was boring for designers where a "diff" between graphics files is neither readable nor meaningful, and where automatic merges are impossible anyway. But branching has the power to reflect the natural work-flow of a designer who permanently goes back to previous versions in order to try different variants. Reflecting this via "Save as ..." (and naming files accordingly) is very cumbersome. Although I personally think this guy overrated the power of branches, this might change once the Git user interfaces becomes simpler to use, more targeted to designers (rather than just software developers) and better integrated into graphical tools like Gimp, Inkscape or even Photoshop.
  - rchowe 16y ago
    What Git really needs is a few tools like Versions and Cornerstone were for SVN: simple apps that didn't require any command line use at all. Git Tower might be there, but I haven't used it so I can't say that 100%.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
  - random42 16y ago
    > On the other hand, maybe we should make designers want to use Git. I use Git, and its a wonderful piece of software craft indeed, but it does not have Windows/Mac clients, that designers often use, as their base OS. A decent usable frontend for Git, on platforms other than Linux too, needs to be developed, for it to be usable by designers. Edit - I meant to say officially supported frontend and support for other oses by git.
    - tvon 16y ago
      Relevant Stack Overflow question on GUI git clients: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/455698/best-visual-client-for-git-on-mac-os-x http://stackoverflow.com/questions/455698/best-visual-client...
    - vog 16y ago
      > Git [...] does not have Windows/Mac clients Since the target group were designers, the presenter used a Mac, and tried to do everything using a GUI client for Git. I don't remember which one he used, but it ran natively on the Mac and it looked quite nice. (Still, the presenter sometimes struggled with that GUI. He was obviously more used to the command line.)
      - jackolas 16y ago
        Most git actions don't need a deep understanding of Git nor a full GUI to function. I think git gui and gitx probably are enough to get a designer going.
beaumartinez 16y ago
> Finally, one of the developers imported the file into the GIMP, changed some stuff on the icon without discussion, botched the output and then added that to the project. Isn't that part of the "contract" of FOSS? You relinquish copyright of your contributions to the project as a whole. (I can see how this can bite designers who don't know much about the FOSS movement.) I suppose in this situation it's a good thing they use a version control system for designer contributions. It certainly is bad practice to change something major with no discussion, but when you contribute something, expect it to be changed.
- jacobolus 16y ago
  You’re missing the point. If an open-source project treated a programmer with the same lack of respect, I wouldn’t expect any different a response. There’s no “contract” that says I have to volunteer my time to someone who won’t even appreciate the donation. On the other hand, I’m not sure it’s fair to indict all open-source projects based on one side of a single story. I’d be interested to hear more of the details in this case; sometimes people walk away angry about simple misunderstandings and mixups.
  - rue 16y ago
    I understand what you're saying…but as an open-source contributor I certainly expect that my code can be modified for various reasons. I guess a “work of art” would feel more personal, and (unless given a tight spec of elements that must be included) is more of a candidate for either rejection or admission as-is. For changes I'd certainly expect a request “can you add a wizard hat on the ninja?” rather than someone modifying it themselves. That said, I don't think it's a one-way street (and good design is sorely lacking). The designers should have or take an interest in the general operating procedures just like they would for any paid work.
    - knowtheory 16y ago
      Actually the whole mentality that this was just a work of art is the problem. When you do design for applications there are functional and conceptual components to the design. If people are taking your work and buggering up your intent, that's a problem, just the same way it is when someone takes code and alters its behavior without consideration for the code's intent. The experience the designer had, and this conversation just belies the remaining gulf between the two groups.
stephenson 16y ago
I agree, developers and designers must learn to communicate and work together. I dont think this problem only applies to open source, i think a lot of companys have the same problem internal. It would be great to have some type of easy non tech integration to git (github?) for designers to use.
- cool-RR 16y ago
  One great thing that GitHub allows in this context is editing code files in the browser, and then GitHub stages and commits the file for you.
  - stephenson 16y ago
    I know, but it stil uses all the technical terms and you needs to know gits workflow.
  - jarin 16y ago
    Holy. Crap. I've been using GitHub for a while and I had no idea about this.
perlgeek 16y ago
That experience sucks indeed. I guess there are two lessons to be learned: 1) try to lift the technical burden from the designer. If the designer sends a file as a mail attachment, just add it to a branch of your repo yourself (with permission, hopefully) 2) when programmers see a small bug in a piece of code, they often fix it. Don't assume you can and should do the same with designs. Talk to the designer.
- neutronicus 16y ago
  Maybe also: have a designer high in the project hierarchy whose responsibility it is to merge design packages.
  - AaronChampagne 16y ago
    Having someone to direct the efforts of other designers would definitely help. Style guides would also help.
caseysoftware 16y ago
That really sucks. I'm sorry that she had such a poor experience. On our project, we've been working really hard to meet designers (and developers and users) where they are. Most of the time when someone asks how to contribute, we list the: * Ideal way, easiest for us; * Less ideal way, maybe a good middle ground; * Difficult for us way, still possible, but likely to take longer to get incorporated; It doesn't always work but it usually gives people a starting point. Also, on the plus side, it leaves little trails & tips all over the place on how they could contribute better. My 0.02.
AaronChampagne 16y ago
This would kill it for me. I've spent my whole adult life learning to use graphite and charcoal, oil paint and clay. Having my entire effort refused because I don't know what a GIT is just doesn't work for me. Having communication barriers like this absolutely would stop me from participating. I have no problem with being asked to redesign a logo over and again. I would love to feel like I belonged to a community and that I mattered. But having a developer jack my work and screw it up because it was easier than asking me to do it would completely scare me away from open source projects.

by pieter 16y ago

gidea 16y ago

This seems like one in a million. I don't think webdev's are all like that but I see your point.

Sirupsen 16y ago

Yes, version control definitely seems like one of the biggest gaps. The communication between developers and designers have to improve, and the developers will have to realize they can't ask every designer for commits, but they can probably ask them for .zip files.

vog 16y ago
On the other hand, maybe we should make designers want to use Git. This might be not as crazy as it sounds, as I recently learned: A few weeks ago, there was a short presentation about Git, targeted at non-programmers such as graphics and web designers. After the presentation, one of the designers (who apparently already knew about Git) stood up and criticized the presenter for not going deeper into branches and auto-branching. Of course, the presenter intentionally left that topic out, in order to not confuse all those Git newbies. However, the designer argued that this is what would make Git interesting for designers. He said that all this diff/commit/push/pull stuff was boring for designers where a "diff" between graphics files is neither readable nor meaningful, and where automatic merges are impossible anyway. But branching has the power to reflect the natural work-flow of a designer who permanently goes back to previous versions in order to try different variants. Reflecting this via "Save as ..." (and naming files accordingly) is very cumbersome. Although I personally think this guy overrated the power of branches, this might change once the Git user interfaces becomes simpler to use, more targeted to designers (rather than just software developers) and better integrated into graphical tools like Gimp, Inkscape or even Photoshop.
- rchowe 16y ago
  What Git really needs is a few tools like Versions and Cornerstone were for SVN: simple apps that didn't require any command line use at all. Git Tower might be there, but I haven't used it so I can't say that 100%.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- random42 16y ago
  > On the other hand, maybe we should make designers want to use Git. I use Git, and its a wonderful piece of software craft indeed, but it does not have Windows/Mac clients, that designers often use, as their base OS. A decent usable frontend for Git, on platforms other than Linux too, needs to be developed, for it to be usable by designers. Edit - I meant to say officially supported frontend and support for other oses by git.
  - tvon 16y ago
    Relevant Stack Overflow question on GUI git clients: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/455698/best-visual-client-for-git-on-mac-os-x http://stackoverflow.com/questions/455698/best-visual-client...
  - vog 16y ago
    > Git [...] does not have Windows/Mac clients Since the target group were designers, the presenter used a Mac, and tried to do everything using a GUI client for Git. I don't remember which one he used, but it ran natively on the Mac and it looked quite nice. (Still, the presenter sometimes struggled with that GUI. He was obviously more used to the command line.)
    - jackolas 16y ago
      Most git actions don't need a deep understanding of Git nor a full GUI to function. I think git gui and gitx probably are enough to get a designer going.

beaumartinez 16y ago

> Finally, one of the developers imported the file into the GIMP, changed some stuff on the icon without discussion, botched the output and then added that to the project. Isn't that part of the "contract" of FOSS? You relinquish copyright of your contributions to the project as a whole. (I can see how this can bite designers who don't know much about the FOSS movement.) I suppose in this situation it's a good thing they use a version control system for designer contributions. It certainly is bad practice to change something major with no discussion, but when you contribute something, expect it to be changed.

jacobolus 16y ago
You’re missing the point. If an open-source project treated a programmer with the same lack of respect, I wouldn’t expect any different a response. There’s no “contract” that says I have to volunteer my time to someone who won’t even appreciate the donation. On the other hand, I’m not sure it’s fair to indict all open-source projects based on one side of a single story. I’d be interested to hear more of the details in this case; sometimes people walk away angry about simple misunderstandings and mixups.
- rue 16y ago
  I understand what you're saying…but as an open-source contributor I certainly expect that my code can be modified for various reasons. I guess a “work of art” would feel more personal, and (unless given a tight spec of elements that must be included) is more of a candidate for either rejection or admission as-is. For changes I'd certainly expect a request “can you add a wizard hat on the ninja?” rather than someone modifying it themselves. That said, I don't think it's a one-way street (and good design is sorely lacking). The designers should have or take an interest in the general operating procedures just like they would for any paid work.
  - knowtheory 16y ago
    Actually the whole mentality that this was just a work of art is the problem. When you do design for applications there are functional and conceptual components to the design. If people are taking your work and buggering up your intent, that's a problem, just the same way it is when someone takes code and alters its behavior without consideration for the code's intent. The experience the designer had, and this conversation just belies the remaining gulf between the two groups.

stephenson 16y ago

I agree, developers and designers must learn to communicate and work together. I dont think this problem only applies to open source, i think a lot of companys have the same problem internal. It would be great to have some type of easy non tech integration to git (github?) for designers to use.

cool-RR 16y ago
One great thing that GitHub allows in this context is editing code files in the browser, and then GitHub stages and commits the file for you.
- stephenson 16y ago
  I know, but it stil uses all the technical terms and you needs to know gits workflow.
- jarin 16y ago
  Holy. Crap. I've been using GitHub for a while and I had no idea about this.

perlgeek 16y ago

That experience sucks indeed. I guess there are two lessons to be learned: 1) try to lift the technical burden from the designer. If the designer sends a file as a mail attachment, just add it to a branch of your repo yourself (with permission, hopefully) 2) when programmers see a small bug in a piece of code, they often fix it. Don't assume you can and should do the same with designs. Talk to the designer.

neutronicus 16y ago
Maybe also: have a designer high in the project hierarchy whose responsibility it is to merge design packages.
- AaronChampagne 16y ago
  Having someone to direct the efforts of other designers would definitely help. Style guides would also help.

caseysoftware 16y ago

That really sucks. I'm sorry that she had such a poor experience. On our project, we've been working really hard to meet designers (and developers and users) where they are. Most of the time when someone asks how to contribute, we list the: * Ideal way, easiest for us; * Less ideal way, maybe a good middle ground; * Difficult for us way, still possible, but likely to take longer to get incorporated; It doesn't always work but it usually gives people a starting point. Also, on the plus side, it leaves little trails & tips all over the place on how they could contribute better. My 0.02.

AaronChampagne 16y ago

This would kill it for me. I've spent my whole adult life learning to use graphite and charcoal, oil paint and clay. Having my entire effort refused because I don't know what a GIT is just doesn't work for me. Having communication barriers like this absolutely would stop me from participating. I have no problem with being asked to redesign a logo over and again. I would love to feel like I belonged to a community and that I mattered. But having a developer jack my work and screw it up because it was easier than asking me to do it would completely scare me away from open source projects.