Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes • Hacker News Board

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#71

Post by mepcotterell » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:15 PM UTC

wilfra wrote: post #57

I really like how frequently words like 'dropped' 'removed' and 'consolidated' are used. Was a little worried about bloat with the creators now having more time to devote to it. Great to see that wont be a problem!

Any reason why you prefer that over "deprecated"?

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#72

Post by johnny22 » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:18 PM UTC

hackerboos wrote: post #11

How about dropping support for LESS and using SASS instead?

does SASS work without installing the pre-processor? I know LESS does. I didn't think SASS did. LESS will work well enough with just the js file loaded (if a bit slower).

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#73

Post by jbrooksuk » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:21 PM UTC

Ok... I can see the rationale behind almost every single change here, and whilst I love the changes, this will undoubtedly cause me no end but problems when I revisit a project, change the source of a CSS file and wonder why it no longer works. This is because I've setup a Codekit framework with Bootstrap. If I change anything now, I'll be changing the entire project for the sake of a couple of classes. Dang!

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#74

Post by ceejayoz » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:25 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #39

ckluis wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be great to get a prospective date in those types of announcements.

I understand why people want it, but I'd rather most open-source projects avoided announcing release dates. Best case is they spend a bunch of time on estimation that they could have spent on delivery. More likely is that they rush something that was unexpectedly hard, or drop things that the would have rather kept in. Or, worst of both worlds, they announce dates that they then slip. Better, I think, that things are…

"We're thinking probably January" versus "sometime late 2013" would be useful and feasible to provide, though.

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#75

Post by sp332 » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:25 PM UTC

mepcotterell wrote: post #71

wilfra wrote: post #57

I really like how frequently words like 'dropped' 'removed' and 'consolidated' are used. Was a little worried about bloat with the creators now having more time to devote to it. Great to see that wont be a problem!

Any reason why you prefer that over "deprecated"?

Seeing lots of stuff dropped is preferred to seeing lots of bloat added.

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#76

Post by timrpeterson » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:30 PM UTC

RossM wrote: post #25

phinnaeus wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The also redid their scaffolding model (grid system) to use percent widths instead of pixel widths, so it seems like the default (and only option) will be for things to behave like the old fluid layouts did.

However I am not looking forward to removing all the row-fluid/container-fluids in my templates.

@RossM searching and replacing "row-fluid" with "row" isn't hard using most text editors,

try SublimeText2 which is generally very impressive, using shift-command-F enables search replace across the file directory location of your choice..

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#77

Post by solox3 » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:34 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #40

> All variables now use dashes instead of camelCase. For example, it's now @body-background instead of @bodyBackground. Not sure how I feel about this. On one hand that's a pretty large sweeping change that is going to break all my customizations. On the other, dashes look much better in css and I prefer them for class names and so on. Not even sure why, is this some sort of community standard I picked up somewhere a…

Maybe they aren't using the property of the dash character just yet, but it is special in CSS: http://stackoverflow.com/a/5598250

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#78

Post by mikhuang » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:41 PM UTC

Any word on carousel supporting fades? They mention vertical movement but thus far I've had to hack in fades a lot

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#79

Post by ses4j » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:44 PM UTC

I wish they weren't dropping IE7 support. You can make fun of "who uses that!" all you want, but we build a site that is used by government people who can't control their own computers, and our current demographics are 50% IE7! Nothing to be done, we just can't upgrade to Bootstrap 3.0. So -- if you MUST do this, at least leave the website docs up for Bootstrap 2, cause we're not going anywhere...

Re: Bootstrap 3.0 Upcoming changes

#80

Post by abraham » Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 6:44 PM UTC

mepcotterell wrote: post #71

wilfra wrote: post #57

I really like how frequently words like 'dropped' 'removed' and 'consolidated' are used. Was a little worried about bloat with the creators now having more time to devote to it. Great to see that wont be a problem!

Any reason why you prefer that over "deprecated"?

Deprecation keeps the code around to increase size, reduce performance, and slow down development.