GNOME, Fedora, and login-screen logos

A recent debate on the Fedora desktop list shined some light on the occasionally awkward relationship between user interface design and open source projects. The original issue was one of visual branding, in particular where and how the distribution logo should be displayed on the login screen. But the subsequent discussion revealed just how quickly such questions can pivot into more substantial issues—such as end-user support, the selection of system components, and the easily entangled needs of upstream and downstream projects.

Leggo my logo

Ryan Lerch wrote to the list on March 18, observing that in Fedora 19 the Fedora logo on the GDM login screen had been moved to the side and reduced significantly in size. Lerch originally asked only why the logo had been moved; in reply, GNOME designer Allan Day said that GNOME had decided that the layout used in Fedora 18 was causing problems. There was already a bug open on the topic, and while Day agreed that the layout used in Fedora 19 looked wrong, simply reverting back to the older design was a non-starter.

The problem with the old layout started with the fact that the distribution logo sat directly above GDM's list of user accounts, which put it in the way whenever the list was long and vertical space ran short. Whether that means that the logo looked weird if it was pushed to the top of the screen or if it was simply impossible to place the logo statically (given that the user list can change size) was not fully explained, but there were other visual problems at issue, too—such as having the centered logo sitting on top of the left-justified list of users.

Several ideas were bandied about. Eventually the solution that was implemented in GNOME 3.8 test builds (and is slated for inclusion in Fedora 19) moved the logo to the upper-left-hand corner of the login screen, shrunken down to fit within the confines of the menu bar. Lerch pointed to a screenshot (see the Fedora 18 version for comparison). The result is virtually unreadable; the Fedora logo includes text but it has the "infinity f" bubble floating above it, too; the upshot is that when scaled down the text is half the height of the date and time display. In addition to the size, however, Lerch reported that placing the logo in the menu bar was confusing, because it looked like an interactive UI element (which is the case for everything else in the menu bar).

The look, the feel of GNOME

On the bug report, Day commented that GNOME's design team had decided that the distribution logo should be dropped from the GDM login screen entirely, and that the distribution name should be rendered as a text string in the menu bar. He opened two additional bugs (695691 and 695692) to discuss where else the distribution could place its branding elements.

But that solution did not sit well with the Fedora team. Jared Smith commented that the change hurt Fedora's branding. Fedora designer Máirín Duffy asked how often GNOME expected there to be so many users on a system that the GDM user list would need all of the screen space, and asked for clarification on how the logo "visually clashes" with the login screen, as an earlier bug described it. "Removing the logo completely and replacing it with a string is completely unacceptable from a Fedora point of view, and I'm very surprised this is the suggested solution," she said.

Day replied with additional detail on the visual problems, explaining:

His preference was to move the distribution branding to the corner so as to "mitigate the negative impact of including a logo while retaining a visual reference to the distributor," he said, although he also agreed that Lerch's critique of the solution deployed was valid.

But therein lies the root of the disagreement. Does the distribution logo "negatively impact" the user's experience, or not? The Fedora project members clearly regard branding the login screen to be an important part of the overall user experience. Those on the GNOME side argued that branding which grabs the user's attention makes the user experience worse, and thus hurts the distribution. In fact, they argued that any prominent logo was problematic—neither Day nor anyone else from the GNOME team was advocating removing the Fedora logo and replacing it with a GNOME logo. Cosimo Cecchi even asked why the login screen needs any branding whatsoever, since he wants to get past the login screen as quickly as possible, and on to his desktop.

Seth Vidal asked "So the question is this: Is the user installing Fedora or are they installing Gnome? I think it is Fedora." Duffy concurred; she responded that as a practical matter, where the user goes when they encounter a problem is paramount; since Fedora users will come to the Fedora community (not the GNOME project) for help, reinforcing the Fedora brand is important.

Complicating the question is the fact that GNOME is the default desktop environment in Fedora, but historically it has not been the only option. Changes in the GNOME 3 era have seen desktop-neutral Fedora components replaced with GNOME-specific ones, which can marginalize or adversely affect other environments like Xfce. Adam Williamson noted the replacement of Fedora firstboot with gnome-initial-setup, and pointed out that GDM was "now a special instance of GNOME Shell, strongly integrated with GNOME." Vidal even suggested that Fedora consider display managers other than GDM, but that idea was not well received.

Another level of complication stems from the fact that many developers are active participants in both projects, and many are paid employees of Red Hat. As Colin Walters observed, even if Red Hat does not dictate changes to Fedora, its developers must keep Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) in mind while they work, since Fedora serves as RHEL's upstream.

The hidden mysteries of design

Finally, the discussion also reveals how tricky it can be to merge the work of software developers and user interface designers. At times, the two camps do not even seem to speak the same language. Design rarely results in something that can be read, diff'ed, or checked in, so feedback from designers can at times be frustratingly terse or opaque. Consider Day's comment "the design is to have a string with the distributor name in the top left hand corner." That reads like a final decision; one could be forgiven for not seeing how to respond to it.

Duffy's comments, however, illustrate that the gap can be bridged. Design is not the same as engineering, but solutions can be researched, tested, and evaluated, which is good engineering practice, and takes design out of the hard-to-grasp "pure aesthetic" realm and integrates it with developing an actual product. She questioned the "design" angle of removing the logo, saying:

Similarly, Lerch's observations that the Fedora 19 logo was unreadably small and that its placement in the menu bar was easily confused with an interactive element are both feedback from a real-world user test (albeit an informal one). Distributions tend to put branding in predictable places: boot manager, splash screen, login screen, desktop wallpaper, system menus, and so forth. There may not be a quantifiably optimal size and placement for the Fedora logo (or any other user interface element), but testing is the only way to adequately compare the imperfect solutions available.

For now the GDM login screen in GNOME 3.8 is a done deal; the project has entered a freeze in preparation for the release of 3.8.0. The good news is that Day and the other members of the design team are open to releasing an update with 3.8.1. Fedora 19 is not scheduled for release until late June 2013, which should be plenty of time to try out a variety of possibilities and come up with something that both upstream and downstream developers are satisfied to see while they enter their passwords.

---

(Log in to post comments)