Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix/client section #62

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jan 17, 2025
Merged

Fix/client section #62

merged 8 commits into from
Jan 17, 2025

Conversation

portdeveloper
Copy link
Member

Description

image

Implements the new BG client section design as per the img above

msedge_opjLqTjHpJ.mp4

Copy link

vercel bot commented Dec 31, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
buidlguidl-landing ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jan 17, 2025 8:51pm

@austintgriffith
Copy link
Contributor

we want to try to match the style of these other two sections

the illustration needs to nudged over to the right maybe

the next and title need to be the same format as the others
image

@portdeveloper
Copy link
Member Author

@austintgriffith so we get the img to be a little bit smaller and also the text right? basically we should be making at as close to the other ones as possible?

@portdeveloper
Copy link
Member Author

image
Maybe something like this?

@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
@import url("https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Space+Grotesk:wght@300;400;500;600;700&display=swap");
@import url("https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Space+Mono:wght@400;700&display=swap");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it worth it to add a new font? We already have a few fonts on the site and some inconsistencies (like the batches section)

When in doubt I'd personally try to keep the site consistent. If not, we might end up with a monstrosity after a few iterations of tweaking sections. I think Space Grotesk is fine (I'd also fix the Batches section). But we can use font-mono if we really want monospaced.

Also this monospace is only being used in one paragraph (+ is different from the nodes website!)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey!

It was my idea to add the Space Mono in the beginning, cause it's very similar to the Chivo mono (original Node's font) and it's the one we're using in the Grants so it'd still be a bit consistent - but I also think keeping the Space Grotesk is fine, and now that I see it with the big title too (like other sections) it doesn't make a lot of sense to change only the paragraph's font c:

So I agree with using Space Grotesk here as in other sections, and mixing it up (in further cases) only when the overall section is much different, but also fitting in the site - like Grants section.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So what's the verdict here :P

@andrealbiac
Copy link
Contributor

andrealbiac commented Jan 13, 2025

Hello! Just a little comment on the logo placement, also to be consistent with other sections

I think I'd rather keep it above the title or by the button (on the right). We never really use it below the button, if anything above it, between that and the text :D

(sorry I didn't foresee this on the original draft)

@portdeveloper
Copy link
Member Author

image
logo as title or

image
title as title?

ill go to sleep and wake up in 7 hrs dm me for any changes or just dont hesitate to make any changes

@andrealbiac
Copy link
Contributor

Can we try to put the logo here by the button? @portdeveloper
403120586-e4030818-4af9-479f-aedc-1b30b8a759ac

Otherwise the second option you sent looks better for me

@portdeveloper
Copy link
Member Author

image
How does this look? @andrealbiac

@carletex carletex merged commit b8945d7 into main Jan 17, 2025
3 checks passed
@carletex carletex deleted the fix/client-section branch January 17, 2025 22:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants