> If you feel disoriented, give it a minute. Once you are used to it, you might notice it’s actually easier on the eyes and a bit lighter. I've been staring at it for 5 minutes now and I'm still disoriented. The borders and gradients gave the design an attractive depth and by removing them you ruined for me. The whole high-contrast/no-gradient thing is also one of the reasons I dislike using Gitlab. It was all going…
Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
41–50 of 315 posts
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#42I think it's strange to focus on all these details without addressing what seems to me the overwhelming problem with the GitHub layout - the deprioritisation of the readme. Why is it below the fold? I was very confused for a considerable time when people would point me to GitHub for a description of a project, because there didn't appear to be a description, just a repo. Was I supposed to build it to see what it was?…
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#43> If you feel disoriented, give it a minute. Once you are used to it, you might notice it’s actually easier on the eyes and a bit lighter. I've been staring at it for 5 minutes now and I'm still disoriented. The borders and gradients gave the design an attractive depth and by removing them you ruined for me. The whole high-contrast/no-gradient thing is also one of the reasons I dislike using Gitlab. It was all going…
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#44> If you feel disoriented, give it a minute. Once you are used to it, you might notice it’s actually easier on the eyes and a bit lighter. I've been staring at it for 5 minutes now and I'm still disoriented. The borders and gradients gave the design an attractive depth and by removing them you ruined for me. The whole high-contrast/no-gradient thing is also one of the reasons I dislike using Gitlab. It was all going…
On a related note, Gmail's latest redesign for Android made the exact same blunder when viewed in the compact density. Just sender/subject/sender/subject with very little indication of each one being a separate email. They spent an extra line break, rather than adding a nice horizontal divider, which would have used less space and given more visual separation.
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#45Two nitpicks: 1. Why are the images cropped so strangely on mobile? It makes this article really hard to read. 2. Shouldn’t the title be “Redesigning the GitHub Repository Page”? ^ And a meta question for programmers, what do you do when English grammar calls for a question mark to be inside your quotation mark at the end of a sentence, but you’re literally quoting something that should not include the question mark?…
AP style (at least, according to the cheatsheets I've found online; I don't have access to the current edition of the full guide) only puts periods and commas inside quotation marks-- question marks, exclamation points, semicolons, and other punctuation only go inside quotation marks if they belong to the quoted matter.
So, that makes "Shouldn’t the title be 'Redesigning the GitHub Repository Page'?" correct, according to them, at least. (This is a matter of style more than a matter of grammar, though.)
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#46The tabs especially looks like a terrible idea. Something that had more than enough space on every screen has now become a huge, long list of options that you have to scan every time to find the one you want. Removal of icons also plays into that since they were the visual hooks you could use to navigate after a little while of usage. Then the final redesign, I’m not sure there’s anything to say about it other than t…
The usability issue that it solves, however, is genuinely serious:
> let’s say I’m in Wiki and need to see Releases. What should I do? There’s no Releases tab visible, so I must figure out somehow that Releases are part of the Code
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#47Two nitpicks: 1. Why are the images cropped so strangely on mobile? It makes this article really hard to read. 2. Shouldn’t the title be “Redesigning the GitHub Repository Page”? ^ And a meta question for programmers, what do you do when English grammar calls for a question mark to be inside your quotation mark at the end of a sentence, but you’re literally quoting something that should not include the question mark?…
“Redesigning the Github Repository Page” shouldn’t the title be?
Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#48Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#49Re: Redesigning GitHub Repository Page
#50When they started touching the content, I got a lot more hesitant.
1. I can't articulate why, but honestly it's extremely useful to see the last commit message on each file. It gives me a sense of which files have changed and if my changes are still the latest ones. It's not foolproof, but it doesn't have to be. It's more psychological but still necessary in a comforting sense.
2. Second, the reason github was successful is because unlike other repository UI's, it showed the code front and center. Nobody wants to look at a commit log, which is the approach that most other repositories used to take. Github cleverly realized that people want to jump right into the code or better yet understand the code, so they showed the file browser and a README. That pattern seems so obvious to us now but it wasn't always. It's kind of laughable that the article focused so much on design but failed to get the core of that idea.