Announcement / Banner Color pallet choices (introduced in ~ 14.5 -> 14.10) are too limited, bland.
Everyone can contribute. Help move this issue forward while earning points, leveling up and collecting rewards.
The whole point of a banner announcement is to stand out, not blend in. The current (since 14.9?) is a horrible UX regression.
The Admin/Messages section has gone through several UX redesigns. Long ago, admins could select background and foreground colors from a set palette, but it was a fairly broad palette of bold, pure colors, not subdued pastels. Today's restriction of colors to a small handful of "themes" isn't in and of itself bad, but the options are very limited and the colors are bland and do not stand out from the surrounding colors. I suppose the only benefit (perhaps) is compatibility with dark mode?
Why doesn't the simplest solution suffice? I would hope that the administrator of a git site can handle basic RGB. But I hear there's a technology called a color picker? Maybe too advanced here. If there is something that needs to be automatic, let it be link-color handling.
It is also a bit frustrating to see that my announcement that the "System is being upgraded" went from an alarming red to a boring blue. During the upgrade. And that the other messages for similar occasions are all reset to the same color. I assume that information is lost forever after the migration. Well done!
Also, the message no longer "floats" and blends in too nicely with the top banner and side-banner. Again, makes the banner less visible.
Proposed solution
Please do not disrespect the intelligence of admins, and allow us to select both background and foreground colors independently with a possible option or preview for dark-mode handling. Separate the banner from the top banner, side-bar.
Or just give us a css file we can edit.
cf gitlab-foss#28139 (closed) 5 years ago. It wasn't too bad then!
cf #375218 I vehemently disagree with the notion of automatically selecting a contrast color. Why isn't simple good enough?
cf #325352 (comment 1053670609) Apparently the issue that created today's mess.
cf #354427 (closed) Open issue but from a prior update. The complaint is the same, but the title proposes the wrong solution.