Project Browser: Create a logo for Structure Sync

Moving this from project_browser queue to project queue per @leslieg.

I am Picking up

I have created the logo, please review.

@manojsaha, thank you for your contribution!

I'm still learning how to give good design feedback, but I will do my best! Here are some of my thoughts:

1. 👍 I like the blocks pictured in the circle in the lower-left.
2. 👍 I like the menus pictured in the circle in the lower-right.
3. ❓ What does the letter "t" in the teardrop in the circle at the top represent?
4. ❓ Why do the arrows point from the circle containing the "t"-teardrop to the blocks on the left, and the menus on the right?

(my use of emoji in this comment is inspired by Daniel Wehner's Emoji code review pattern)

@mparker17, Thank you for your feedback.

Letter 't' here represent the drupal taxonomy terms and the teardrop icon represents drupal logo. I have modified the arrows in the logo.

@manojsaha, thank you for clarifying, and for taking the time to update the logo.

🔧 Do you think that a tag icon like the one at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Tag_icon_cc0.svg&ol... would better represent taxonomy terms? I have seen it used for tags on other non-Drupal websites too.

🤔 Regarding the arrows in the updated logo, the arrows now appear to suggest that structure_sync can convert taxonomy terms into menu items, menu items into blocks, and blocks into taxonomy terms (it reminds me a bit of the the recycling symbol, which suggests that a recyclable material can be converted into something else)... But, structure_sync converts taxonomy terms, menu items, and blocks into configuration (and back). Do you have an idea for how to visually represent Drupal configuration?

(my use of emoji in this comment is inspired by Daniel Wehner's Emoji code review pattern)

Hi @mparker17, As per the requirement, I have updated the logo design. Please review the changes.

From my point of view, this module is about making synchronization of (structure & more?) entities through drupal configuration system.
I would avoid mentionning taxonomies, blocks and menus in the logo and keep a symbol referring to entities instead of each one

The overall logo is looking good

@manojsaha thank you for taking the time to update the logo again! I am (personally) satisfied with the logo in #8.

@louis-cuny, thank you for clarifying! I was not aware that there were plans for structure_sync to synchronize more entity types beyond blocks, menus, and terms, so this is good to know!

(In the past, I have used the Default Content module → when I have needed to synchronize more-complex entities - I saw structure_sync as a lighter-weight solution than default_content)

For what it's worth, when providing design feedback for Project Browser Logos on other projects that I maintain, I have advocated for logos to describe what the module does right now, rather than features that might be added in the future. My reasoning for this is:

1. We can always change the logo when we add new functionality.
2. Site builders are going to see this logo in the Project Browser when they are searching for a module to solve their problem, so I feel that it is important to set their expectations appropriately, and not confuse or disappoint them by hinting at features that do not exist.

All that being said, I am open to new designs and ideas!

Hi all,
Sorry for late joining into the party! After having a look at all the logo alternatives that have been provided here and going through all the feedbacks, my take is going to align with @mparker17
I've worked on another PB logo issue for a project maintained by him: Sitemap
https://www.drupal.org/project/sitemap/issues/3459435 📌 Project Browser: Create a logo for Sitemap Active
@louis-cuny Even there I had prepared the logo for the module in similar thought like yours but later on @mparker17's argument seemed legit to me, as that has high chances to set erroneous expectation among user.
We can definitely modify the logo according to the enhanced functionality that has been proposed by you, but as of now I think it'll be better to restrict the logo to visually represent only that aspect which is available right now.
In worst case scenarios it might happen that the newly proposed functionality might get shelved for quite a few time, which in turn will increase the wrong predictability in multi folds.
Thanks @manojsaha for your efforts and contribution. The logo looks good to me, hence I'm moving this forward to RTBC++