Lucide[1] is a very active fork of Feather and what I’ve been using for the past few years instead.
Feather is great as are their design guidelines, but it needs way way more icons. Lucide picks up beautifully where it left off.
Feather is great as are their design guidelines, but it needs way way more icons. Lucide picks up beautifully where it left off.
But seriously, I 100% agree! No one is paying for these icons. Mistakes happen. The world is not ending if they do not get corrected immediately. We all have a ton of things we are working on and cannot always make our FLOSS side-projects our top priority.
(Though, I will readily admit that this raises some provocative questions about how much "mission critical" projects should rely on open source projects which they have no contract/SLA/affiliation with...)
Of course I'm sure the second person to touch a computer did something irresponsible with it, so what can you do, right?
I've seen plenty of terrible quality closed source projects and even some impressive high quality closed source projects that were still imperfect and open to human error.
I don't think we should have lower levels of scrutiny or expectations from open source projects. I do think the gp's criticism was exaggerated and unwarranted for any project, open or closed.
It's open source, you've seen the error and you know how to fix it. Make a pull request yourself.
If it really bothers you so much, it sounds like it would’ve taken you less time to fix it than to complain all the way over here. I’m pointing this out not because open source is often thankless (it can be), but because this kind of negativity snipe is often demoralizing even for those of us not even maintaining the project.
I guess some discretion is required before using any of those icon fonts. That's really not a point against it.
Anyway, my favorite feature is that the disability guy is in a rush.
That’s actually a thing now: https://blog.logomyway.com/new-handicapped-logo-and-the-hist...
For me the rushing icon does look better. But I wonder why they didn't make the icon on a more normal position, with the body and arms closer to the resting position. We don't make signage with people running except when we actually want to say that they are going fast; the same should apply here.
The article linked by grandparent says: "the new design pictures a handicapped individual with their head tilted forward, indicating their mobility and that they are in control of where they are going. The new design also pictures the individual with their arms back, once again indicating that they are dynamic and in control of their own mobility."
If you just reduce the inclination of the body and arms, you get that effect.
This wasn't meant to be a neutral change, or even a change to bring it from negative connotations to neutral - it's the equivalent of affirmative action for symbols.