Skip to content
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

🎨 Add new logo #1083

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jun 5, 2022
Merged

🎨 Add new logo #1083

merged 9 commits into from
Jun 5, 2022

Conversation

s-weigand
Copy link
Member

@s-weigand s-weigand commented May 28, 2022

This adds the new logo discusses in #832 with the colored border being implemented via CSS instead of a base64 encoded image.

After we finalized decisions about the logos themself (colors, etc.), I will run docs/source/images/recreate_png_logos.py and create the png logos with the different resolutions.

Original logo design @SerLap
Original favicon design @jsnel

New logo in the docs

Change summary

Checklist

  • ✔️ Passing the tests (mandatory for all PR's)
  • 🚧 Added changes to changelog (mandatory for all PR's)
  • 👌 Closes issue (mandatory for ✨ feature and 🩹 bug fix PR's)
  • 📚 Adds documentation of the feature

Closes issues

closes #832

@s-weigand s-weigand requested a review from ism200 May 28, 2022 12:41
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Binder 👈 Launch a binder notebook on branch s-weigand/pyglotaran/new-logo

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 28, 2022

Benchmark is done. Checkout the benchmark result page.
Benchmark differences below 5% might be due to CI noise.

Benchmark diff v0.5.1 vs. main

Parametrized benchmark signatures:

BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(index_dependent, grouped, weight)

All benchmarks:

       before           after         ratio
     [96b42630]       [e5f7e6b2]
     <v0.5.1>                   
         68.8±1ms         69.7±1ms     1.01  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, False, False)
         136±20ms         136±30ms     0.99  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, False, True)
         69.6±2ms         70.8±2ms     1.02  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, True, False)
         118±20ms         129±40ms     1.09  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, True, True)
         85.9±2ms         90.1±2ms     1.05  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, False, False)
        93.8±10ms         101±30ms     1.08  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, False, True)
         88.0±4ms         85.4±3ms     0.97  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, True, False)
         95.9±2ms         95.1±3ms     0.99  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, True, True)
             200M             206M     1.03  IntegrationTwoDatasets.peakmem_optimize
       2.37±0.09s       2.07±0.05s    ~0.87  IntegrationTwoDatasets.time_optimize

Benchmark diff main vs. PR

Parametrized benchmark signatures:

BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(index_dependent, grouped, weight)

All benchmarks:

       before           after         ratio
     [bc25e89e]       [e5f7e6b2]
         71.1±1ms         69.7±1ms     0.98  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, False, False)
         125±40ms         136±30ms     1.09  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, False, True)
         71.1±1ms         70.8±2ms     1.00  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, True, False)
        90.0±40ms         129±40ms    ~1.43  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(False, True, True)
         90.8±2ms         90.1±2ms     0.99  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, False, False)
        99.5±30ms         101±30ms     1.02  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, False, True)
         88.1±1ms         85.4±3ms     0.97  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, True, False)
         127±40ms         95.1±3ms    ~0.75  BenchmarkOptimize.time_optimize(True, True, True)
             202M             206M     1.02  IntegrationTwoDatasets.peakmem_optimize
       2.08±0.07s       2.07±0.05s     1.00  IntegrationTwoDatasets.time_optimize

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 28, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #1083 (bc25e89) into main (bc25e89) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head bc25e89 differs from pull request most recent head e5f7e6b. Consider uploading reports for the commit e5f7e6b to get more accurate results

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main   #1083   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   87.3%   87.3%           
=====================================
  Files        102     102           
  Lines       5388    5388           
  Branches     997     997           
=====================================
  Hits        4704    4704           
  Misses       530     530           
  Partials     154     154           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update bc25e89...e5f7e6b. Read the comment docs.

@s-weigand s-weigand changed the title 🎨 New logo 🎨 Add new logo May 28, 2022
@sourcery-ai
Copy link
Contributor

sourcery-ai bot commented May 28, 2022

Sourcery Code Quality Report

Merging this PR leaves code quality unchanged.

Quality metrics Before After Change
Complexity 1.00 ⭐ 1.00 ⭐ 0.00
Method Length 279.00 ⛔ 279.00 ⛔ 0.00
Working memory 11.00 😞 11.00 😞 0.00
Quality 51.07% 🙂 51.07% 🙂 0.00%
Other metrics Before After Change
Lines 303 303 0
Changed files Quality Before Quality After Quality Change
docs/source/conf.py 51.07% 🙂 51.07% 🙂 0.00%

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File Function Complexity Length Working Memory Quality Recommendation

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

  • ⭐ excellent
  • 🙂 good
  • 😞 poor
  • ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.


Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!

jsnel
jsnel previously approved these changes May 28, 2022
ism200
ism200 previously approved these changes Jun 2, 2022
Copy link
Collaborator

@ism200 ism200 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

fine with me
thanks

Copy link

@SerLap SerLap left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

pyGlot_black

what about such version for dark scheme

@s-weigand s-weigand dismissed stale reviews from ism200 and jsnel via c517c45 June 5, 2022 15:42
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jun 5, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.7% 0.7% Duplication

@s-weigand
Copy link
Member Author

s-weigand commented Jun 5, 2022

@SerLap I updated the color gradient for dark theme based on your comment and also changed the text and background colors to have a stronger contrast.
@jsnel and I decided to only use a text border for the transparent images since there readability is always a gamble depending on users having a light or dark theme.
For comparison of the transparent versions in light and dark themes:
image
image
image
image

@jsnel jsnel removed the request for review from joernweissenborn June 5, 2022 17:32
@SerLap
Copy link

SerLap commented Jun 5, 2022

Looks ok to me

@jsnel jsnel self-requested a review June 5, 2022 17:41
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jun 5, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
0.7% 0.7% Duplication

Copy link
Member

@jsnel jsnel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me too! 🚀

@s-weigand s-weigand merged commit cf859e9 into glotaran:main Jun 5, 2022
@s-weigand s-weigand deleted the new-logo branch June 5, 2022 18:32
@s-weigand s-weigand mentioned this pull request Jun 5, 2022
2 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

✨ Time for a new logo
4 participants