As mentioned before, I’m not inherently against this change. I’ve been only use Retina displays the past few years thua I cann’t speak for lower resolutions. If switching to Font Awesome will solve this issue, I’m all for it - given that we don’t run into any licensing issues.
I guess we won’t run into the licensing issues as long as we’re using the free pack of icons provided by them. Although, i think if in near future, if we need an icon which is not available in the free pack but only in pro pack. That will lead to changing us back to again a FOSS icon repo (i.e. ForkAwesome) because we have to maintain a consistency here. Isn’t it?
i think if in near future, if we need an icon which is not available in the free pack but only in pro pack. That will lead to changing us back to again a FOSS icon repo (i.e. ForkAwesome)
I totally agree with @coderrsid here.
Also, the icons look fine to me and doesn't need an urgent change. We have more significant issues to handle rather than this.
2 Likes
@laurent, according to the font awesome faq, it is open source but does have limitations on it unless you’re willing to get a Pro License. Fork Awesome was a fork of Font Awesome and I wonder if this could be part of why it was forked.
2 Likes
Free Font Awesome icons - 1588
All Fork Awesome icons - 744
JUST RESEARCH BEFORE MAKING A POINT
PR has been already made
Other Issues?
Go and handle them for sure
We are using github and million of people can work on a single repo together and thats why everyone is using it, Isn't it?
Changes in UI are rarely urgent but UI have solid impact on any business (Google it and read about it).
So, I don't know How UI is not a significant issue?
Yes, it is
Great then, wait for the PR to get merged. 
I confirm that on my PC (Windows 10, 1920x1080) it looks ugly
1 Like
The license for Font Awesome Free is indeed quite clear: Font-Awesome/LICENSE.txt at master · FortAwesome/Font-Awesome · GitHub We can use it without changing Joplin's license, and it gives access to the most common icons, probably 99% of what we need.
What I'm curious about is the pros and cons of using Fork Awesome vs Font Awesome. From Fork Awesome's What's New page I found this:
PR freeze
Since Oct 22, 2016, Font Awesome has frozen all pull requests proposing new icons. With Fork Awesome, we are welcoming all your pull requests.
Font Awesome 5.0
Fort Awesome has run a very successful kickstarter campaign and completely redesigned Font Awesome in this new version 5.0. Fork Awesome plans to keep the old look alive.
But I think none of this affects us. PR freeze is not a big problem as the existing icons are plenty so we can usually find what we need, and the support for FA 4 doesn't matter I guess as long as FA5 icons look good.
2 Likes
@giteshsharma, being called bruh aside (not a huge fan of that since it makes me take you less seriously and my comments feel like they're taken as a joke), I don't necessarily agree with the oppositions and arguments made against this in general. To be fair, neither icon set has been that appealing to me, but I have a serious love / hate relationship with UIs in most games and applications. Being given the ability to swap out icon packs for other ones on a per user basis is where I would possibly go with this. 
1 Like
Sorry @bedwardly-down, If you feel that way it wasn't my intention at all. And specially I didn't said that because you took either side of this change.
Everyone's point(including criticism) is important for getting best out of an argument or change. There should be a solid reason for change.
And your comment is as important as everyone's commen to me.
"Bruh" is in my habit nothing else. (I use it to show respect and gratitude towards other)
I will keep this in mind while talking to others as well. Thanks for mentioning this here. (It adds value in my professional life)
1 Like