Penpot: The Open-Source Figma
github.com670 points by selvan 21 hours ago
670 points by selvan 21 hours ago
I really wanted to like penpot, but when I tried a few months ago, simply navigating between pages (even on the example documents) was causing parts of the document to change in bizarre ways. I didn't want that level of risk with documents I actually cared about, so continued to use figma. I guess it's time to give it another shot.
EDIT: still broken 8 months later :(
I think you should post a issue at this point D:
I raised the issue in the forums at the time, with video captures demonstrating the issue(s).
I think it would help to open an issue on github making explicit the following three points explicit in the report:
- steps to reproduce from scratch;
- what you expected to happen;
- what you actually observed (include the screenshot or video capture in addition to a textual description).
Otherwise, you might risk your report being ignored due to a silent misunderstanding about the mismatch between your expectations and the actual results.
At the time i wasn't sure if it was PEBCAK, which is why i started a discussion in the forums. As there were no replies, i received no notifications, and so I forgot all about it.
If anyone is interested in opening a bug report you can see the issue here: https://imgur.com/a/hZ1ja9o
Personally, I do not understand why you think there is a bug from this screen capture alone. Maybe because I am that familiar with penpot and figma, but still, I do not find it obvious.
This is why it's important to describe explicitly the three points in text:
- steps to reproduce;
- what you expected to happen;
- what actual result you observe instead.
Something that might be obvious to you but isn't for others will just be silently ignored most of the time.
EDIT: I now see the problem after reading your other reply above:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46064757#46069546
This is why it's important to describe explicitly the difference between what you expected and what you observed. I swear I did not see the change in button width before reading the linked comment.
> This is why it's important to describe explicitly
That is a fair point. I will take it on board when giving people screenshots and videos of bugs in future.
> I did not see the change in button width
There's actually a lot more visual changes than that just the button, but I will leave that to the reader as an exercise in spot-the-difference ;)
> There's actually a lot more visual changes than that just the button, but I will leave that to the reader as an exercise in spot-the-difference ;)
This is fair. But issues like this will never get my attention in general because I don’t have time to do this exercise - I would much rather have it all spelled out. Even if there are a bunch of related issues they won’t get fixed in a single PR, it likely will be multiple.
I guess my point is that if you really want OSS projects to improve, the issue submitter can’t just ask the maintainer “figure it out”. It totally works this way in the corporate world though (IME).
Edit: I’m sorry to have jumped to conclusions. Leaving my comment up for accountability.
I didn’t ask the maintainer to “figure it out”. I posted a thread in the forum with multiple videos to start a discussion.
People here have stated I should have filed on GitHub, and because I don’t want to link my GitHub to this account I suggested someone else do it.
That was 6 hours ago, and people are still commenting about my lack of a suitable report rather than actually reporting it correctly themselves - as is evident by the lack of a new issue on the github.