Scope and name of this artifact

[lidel]

(we had some casual discussions, but I feel we should make a final decision on this)

Are we going to continue shipping fonts and icons together with css?
Will UI Kit be a single npm package?

• If we want to keep everything under ipfs-css name perhaps it time to change its name to something less CSS centric (ipfs-ui-kit)?
• Or does it make sense to ship UI Kit as multiple packages?
  (ipfs-ui-kit-icons+ipfs-ui-kit-css+ipfs-ui-kit-fonts)

[nothingismagick]

There is a similar discussion over at quasar-cli, which is also about the naming of a folder. I think that ipfs-ui-kitis a good solution to the semantic issue. At the moment, the src of this repo here is css - but maybe at some point in the future it might add js, gulp, less, docker pipelines for building assets - who knows...

[lidel]

Let's time-box this decision until next week.
We should either change the name to ipfs-ui-kit (github repo + npm) or just agree to keep ipfs-css an close this issue.

@olizilla @alanshaw thoughts on this?

[alanshaw]

Personally I'd leave it as ipfs-css. Fonts are referenced by the CSS so need to be included. Having icons available is convenient but I don't think it warrants a name change.

I also think people are more likely to search for ipfs css than ipfs ui kit.

[olizilla]

I'm happy with ipfs-css.

More generally, my plan is to focus on the webui rebuild, and once we're all happy with it, we can update the style guide and this repo with what we learn along the way.

[lidel]

Alright, we are keeping ipfs-css 👍