Thank you for the proposal. I've created #140 to consolidate all the discussions about name / logo changes. Please post your logo suggestions there. Thanks!

If this gets accepted, at least the license file of the base icon should probably be copied into the repository somewhere.

https://lucide.dev/license

@matebitte happy to help unblock this, no TypeScript needed.

The icon git-branch-plus 4.svg is a redraw of Lucide's git-branch-plus. Lucide is ISC-licensed (git-branch-plus is not part of the Feather/MIT subset, just ISC). ISC requires the copyright + permission notice to travel with the work.

Two-step fix:

1. Add app/static/logos/LICENSE-lucide with the full text of lucide-icons/lucide/LICENSE. Putting it at the logos/ level (rather than inside icon-logo.icon/Assets/) keeps it clear of actool when script/build-icon-assets.sh runs.
2. Add a one-line credit to README.md under a new Acknowledgments section, e.g.:

   Application icon adapted from git-branch-plus by Lucide, ISC license.

That covers the source-repo side and is the standard pattern for vendored open-source icons. (If you ever want it in the in-app About panel too, that's a separate small change in script/licenses/update-license-dump.ts, but it's optional and not required for ISC compliance.)

Happy to push these on top of your branch if that helps.

Reopening this PR because I will start having more free time soon, and out of all proposed names I'm currently leaning more towards "Desktop Plus", which fits very nicely with this logo.

I'm aware that "Desktop Plus" can sound a bit bland, but:

1. It's one of the few names without problematic associations or trademark violations.
2. Going from "GitHub Desktop Plus" to just "Desktop Plus" is a smooth mental transition.
3. We don't need the name to be very distinctive because we are not trying to trademark it. If we were a for-profit company I suspect our needs would be very different.
4. It allows us to reuse this logo :)

I think regardless of the specific icon that's picked, we should remove the padding.
Currently because of it, the icon looks smaller than all other icons:

There should be no padding in icons, and you should just let Windows apply the right padding where needed.

I've tested the icons on macOS and Linux, they fit in (the padding is important).

However, I don't have any Windows machines to test, nor do I know how they want things to be.

@Sergio0694

I think regardless of the specific icon that's picked, we should remove the padding. Currently because of it, the icon looks smaller than all other icons:

There should be no padding in icons, and you should just let Windows apply the right padding where needed.

@guplem

Happy to push these on top of your branch if that helps.

sure, please go ahead :)

@matebitte pushed the licensing changes as matebitte#1 (targets your non-corporate-logo branch). It adds the LICENSE-lucide file, the README credit, and a small injection into the in-app license screen so the ISC notice also ships in the distributed binaries (not just the source repo). Merging it there pulls all of it into this PR.

"However, I don't have any Windows machines to test, nor do I know how they want things to be."

If you don't have a Windows machine, just setting up a VM with a fresh W11 build should be fine. You don't need to activate it. Otherwise I'm also happy to help test things if I can get a preview build. Can we have different assets for Windows?

Thanks for the help, everyone!
Now that the big Worktrees merge is done, next week I'll probably focus on doing the rebranding (name + logo change).
I might also wait for the upstream to release its stable 3.5.13 version so I can target 3.5.14. There is no technical reason to do so, but it seems weird to make such a big user-facing change between beta releases, without a version increment.

"However, I don't have any Windows machines to test, nor do I know how they want things to be."

If you don't have a Windows machine, just setting up a VM with a fresh W11 build should be fine. You don't need to activate it. Otherwise I'm also happy to help test things if I can get a preview build. Can we have different assets for Windows?

I’m well aware of how a VM or windows works, but I despise Microsoft with great passion.

If you’ve got a Windows (virtual) machine, please test it. I cannot build for windows on linux or macOS, so you need to build yourself

"but I despise Microsoft with great passion"

Uh... Ok then. I also recommend not looking up who owns GitHub then 😆

"If you’ve got a Windows (virtual) machine, please test it."

I can do that, however if the icons have the same padding as now they'll for sure not be correct (just like they're not correct now either). So my main question was: can we have separate assets for the icons for Windows, so we can drop the padding there? I can help test once we have that, but until we do we already know those icons won't look right.