On Jul 12, 2011 4:17 AM, "Koen Aers" <koen.aers@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, dangerous indeed... You always need to know what you're doing when
> creating software ;-)
>
> And it's still maybe a better analogy than having to lift a heavy hammer,
> work hard and pour a lot of sweat to make your sword sharp ;-)
>
> But I really think a logo should be very simple which would be the case for
> a simple flame...
>
> Cheers,
> Koen
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Paul Bakker <paul.bakker.nl@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> But one small mistake and it will burn your project to the ground... ;-)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Koen Aers <koen.aers@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A bit late but I'll throw in my ideas as well. I also initially liked the
>>> anvil image, but I think we should carefully consider Max's arguments. Also,
>>> though Dan's analogy of 'banging out a sword' is nice, I think it is not
>>> something obvious.
>>>
>>> That's why after thinking about it for a while I would be inclined to be
>>> in favour of r1v6. But I would actually leave out the hands of Prometheus. I
>>> think a flame is a good logo because it is simple, it relates to a forge
>>> well and more in general fire has always been a - dangerous, i admit - tool
>>> for people to create all kinds of things. Moreover fire is very agile, you
>>> can carry and use it everywhere.
>>>
>>> My 2 cents,
>>> Koen
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen <
>>> max.andersen@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> btw. the recognizability factor of the "anvil" is though a big factor.
>>>>
>>>> But wondering how it will look at 64x64/32x32/16x16 icon sizes which is
>>>> what will show up in stuff like eclipse ?
>>>>
>>>> /max
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 09:00, Ronald van Kuijk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Yes, everything you want with the limitation that
>>>> > - it wil be rigid
>>>> > - not flexible (in many ways)
>>>> > - not easily modifieable
>>>> > - made to last (think horseshoes)
>>>> > - ...
>>>> >
>>>> > ;-)
>>>> >
>>>> > Being close to Amsterdam and Antwerp, something like a diamond cutter
>>>> > comes to mind :-)
>>>> >
>>>> > 2011/7/12, Dan Allen <dan.j.allen@gmail.com>:
>>>> >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 17:37, Paul Bakker <paul.bakker.nl@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> I like the sword analogy, makes sense being a "craftsman" developer.
>>>> Not
>>>> >>> sure if a sword would fit well in the logo (might get too
>>>> complicated),
>>>> >>> but
>>>> >>> the idea behind it is perfect :-)
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I agree on the lightweight part too. The only thing that should be
>>>> clear
>>>> >>> is
>>>> >>> that you won't get any lock-in with Forge, but to my opinion a anvil
>>>> >>> doesn't
>>>> >>> say you do have a lock-in. It also implies Forge is a tool that
>>>> supports
>>>> >>> your crafsman work.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> Exactly. Anvils let you create what you want, the way you want to
>>>> create it
>>>> >> :) So indeed.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -Dan
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Dan Allen
>>>> >> Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
>>>> >> Registered Linux User #231597
>>>> >>
>>>> >> http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about
>>>> >> http://mojavelinux.com
>>>> >> http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
>>>> >>
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > forge-dev mailing list
>>>> > forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>> /max
>>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>>> forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> forge-dev mailing list
>>> forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> forge-dev mailing list
>> forge-dev@lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev
>>
>>