Misleading presentation of the source's codename


I was totally misleaded trying to use SD as a source, as the two choices are confusing :
. Use existing codename (I thought, at first, this was the generated codename written above, although this is exactly NOT the case)
. Use new codename (which has the same mallow color as the refresh button : I thought, at first, this was supposed to generate a new codename, which is the exact opposite) :

In terms of UX, I think it would be much more clear with those options :
. Use your existing codename (or previoulsy generated codename)
. Use this new codename


This was indeed very confusing ! It is fixed now and you can see how it looks in the i18n demo page. Is it better ?

Note: contrary to the demo page which runs the stable SecureDrop release, the i18n demo page runs the latest development release.

thanks !

I have only checked EN & FR versions, but wouldn’t it be clearer with :
. Use this new codename (instead of “Use new codename”, as it could be confusing)
. Utilisez ce nouveau nom de code (as “Utiliser un nouveau nom de code” is actually confusing)


Hum, you’re right. Now that there is no ambiguity, it is confusing.

For the record, the proposed fix is at : https://github.com/freedomofpress/securedrop/pull/2768