Comment
At the bottom of this issue, see the lines
Codeberg
Documentation
Community Issues
Landing Page
Well, the first line and logo should be hyperlinked to something.
All there is is
<b>Codeberg</b>
At the bottom of this issue, see the lines
Codeberg
Documentation
Community Issues
Landing Page
Well, the first line and logo should be hyperlinked to something.
All there is is
<b>Codeberg</b>
I mean, the Codeberg header could link to the Landing Page. not sure what Association and Service and Legal could link to.
Yes, it should link to codeberg.org. I am real sorry about the other two though. I don't have any good ideas either.
That's OK! Thank you for the feedback, we've been meaning to cut back on the length for a while now though.
@fnetX Do you think we could remove the headers entirely to save space? The links are still grouped together and essentially categorized.
The headers are relevant for quickly finding the category you are looking for. Headings are never leading somewhere, I don't understand the motivation for this. Turning some of them into links leads to inconsistency, also a bad idea.
Removing them means that users need to scan each category to determine if it contains what's relevant to them.
If you want to save space, we can adjust the font size. I don't know why it's that large, but there is likely a reason for this. It's also unintended that the "Blog, Mastodon ..." line has so much space to the bottom. It could be on one line with the language switcher and overall saving a little.
Also keep in mind that the footer was a rather long design process (see Codeberg/Design#23, and there have been a lot of actions in a Matrix chat back when it was implemented). We can continue improving it, but I don't think single opinions should make us fiddle with the footer back and forth, because the months-long design process where we evaluated all ins and outs has a higher weight for me.
OK, let's adjust the scope of this issue.
If you want to save space, we can adjust the font size. I don't know why it's that large, but there is likely a reason for this.
Instead of closing this issue, I changed the title of this issue to make it more discoverable in the future because this seems to be like the only actionable element here in its current form.
We do not plan to do anything at the moment, but we might circle back to this at a later point.
No due date set.
No dependencies set.
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?