Does Google CDNs host bootstrap, with less or sass similar to the way they do with jquery and some other javascript libraries?
Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
41–50 of 142 posts
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#42Does anyone else feel like every time they release a new version of Bootstrap it is never backwards compatible? I feel like lots of divs on my site need different classes than were used before.
My only problem is that they don't version the docs. I couldn't care less if it were easy to find the docs.
I had to revisit a bootstrap 1 site I put together for a client and it was very annoying to track down the documentation.
I considered opening an issue on github but…
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#43Does it fix the bug In the most recent version whereby dropdowns wouldn't work on ios safari?
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#44Does Google CDNs host bootstrap, with less or sass similar to the way they do with jquery and some other javascript libraries?
no, but http://cdnjs.com does, although I don't think they have the CSS
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#45Does anyone else feel like every time they release a new version of Bootstrap it is never backwards compatible? I feel like lots of divs on my site need different classes than were used before.
My only problem is that they don't version the docs. I couldn't care less if it were easy to find the docs. I had to revisit a bootstrap 1 site I put together for a client and it was very annoying to track down the documentation. I considered opening an issue on github but…
You can just grab the tag of the version you need from Github and the docs are included in there.
i.e. https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/tree/v1.0.0
If that's too complicated for you, I believe there is even someone who hosts an archive of all the version of the docs? He posted elsewhere in this thread..
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#46I'm mainly a backend guy but do some frontend work from time to time. I keep seeing all this talk about a dozen different CSS "frameworks", and I just don't get it. Can someone explain to me what the purpose of these things is? Bootstrap's site for example doesn't even try to tell me what I would want it for, it just says I want it "because its for nerds" (do I have to dress in faux-nerd chic and live in the valley to use it?) and that it uses grids (that's the opposite of a selling point guys).
From looking at the code, all I see is a bunch of boilerplate CSS that seems to deliberately work against the nature of CSS (protip: the C stands for cascading), and is very brittle and tied to specific classes and markup rather than using selectors to be general and reusable. Is that really all it is, just a "I'm too lazy to design my site, so I'll just use twitter's design"? Perhaps it is just the word "framework" throwing me off since it doesn't appear to be a framework in any way? I know this is going to sound needlessly critical to some people, but I am expressing genuine confusion here, I really don't understand what I am supposed to use this for, or how it would help me in any way.
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#47Does anyone else feel like every time they release a new version of Bootstrap it is never backwards compatible? I feel like lots of divs on my site need different classes than were used before.
There should be no problems upgrading from 2.1.2 to 2.2.0—no features were removed and none had their classes changed.
Two changes that I found affected me:
.label's are now display: inline-block. In my particular usage, I needed block in one area.
tooltips used to default to html: true and now they default to html: false - The issue with this is that popovers are now html: false as well. I think popovers should default to html: true given their nature.
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#48Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#49Nice, this finally fixes modals in small browser windows. http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/javascript.html#modals
The modals are a trainwreck in a lot of different ways. I suggest you use this code: http://jschr.github.com/bootstrap-modal/
Re: Bootstrap 2.2.0 released
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what a separate thread would be for.
Perhaps I should have worded it differently then. My goal was simply to provide other relevant alternatives to bootstrap. "Then why are you posting on a completely un-related post for Bootstrap, instead of letting it stand on it's own merits?" Actually, other popular css frameworks highlighting responsive design are very relevant to Bootstrap. Normally, one could let these frameworks stand on their own merits, but it…
"...that any bootstrap post on HN hops the popularity train right to the front page...."
Doesn't mean you should jump on someone else' headline to promote Foundation. That's rude.
Make you own thread. If it isn't as "popular", that's your problem.