
Bootstrap 2.3 Released - gavinballard
http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2013/02/07/bootstrap-2-3-released/
======
bluetidepro
It would be awesome if someone built a Bootstrap version converter. I'm
currently using v2.2.2, and I simply don't really have the time to go through
all the code to get it upgraded to the extent of making sure nothing breaks.

Does anyone know the best way to do things like this, if a converter doesn't
exist? It would be nice if the docs still had old versions, sort of like
WordPress or PHP docs do, where you can see what is depreciated and how to
change/upgrade things to newer versions.

~~~
michaelbuckbee
We haven't announced it yet, but we're working on this as part of what we're
doing at BootstrapHero - <http://www.bootstraphero.com>

We were targeting to have it out more for 2.x to 3.0 as that will be a bigger
jump.

~~~
bluetidepro
I think by posting that, you did just announce it... ;) But yeah, that's
awesome! Can't wait to see it!

------
robomartin
> Renamed all of the variables to use dashes instead of camelCase.

I absolutely detest camelCase. It ranks down there with good-old Hungarian
notation.

So, I am now wondering, why this change? Are people finally coming to their
senses?

~~~
easytiger
just-testing-this

JustTestingThis

Hmm. I think it only matters to me that the author picks one and stays with
it. But that means that all libraries he uses has to use the same one. Which
is why languages tend to prefer one over the other. e.g. Java using CaMeLcAsE

To have them mixed in one code base would be like a micro context switch.

~~~
robomartin
Ah, see, you would have received an error when running this code!

It's "justTestingThis" not "JustTestingThis" if we are talking camel case.

So yeah, camel case and case sensitivity add unnecessary fragility to
programming. Which is the reason I don't like the fad. You accidentally made
my case.

~~~
josteink
camelCase vs PascalCasing is used to signal and separate public from private
in C#, so that you always know what kind of data or function you are working
with.

It's useful.

~~~
Legion
Having a convention is useful. It doesn't necessarily have to be _that_
particular one.

------
zopticity
Man, I love bootstrap. Not only is it pretty well design from the front end
and back end. The less files that are architected are awesome, I wouldn't have
thought of it on my own. The guys built it for full customization for advance
programmers and dead simple for beginners. Keep up the good work!

The only disadvantage to this is that all startups are now 'lazy' and begin
using bootstrap default theme colors and styles -- which makes all website
look the same. I'm not sure whether I feel that we're losing creativity for
people who want to play with colors or we're losing the ability to actually
code up some CSS to make things pretty. (Just my opinion).

Dropping support for IE7 was a good idea. I believe that is the next browser
we're killing after IE6, right? After all, who keeps versions of browser these
days? I mean I lost count when Chrome updates for me -- and Firefox is on
rapid release (18) now. I can't keep up remember all these numbers and
browsers!

Please keep up the good work! Bootstrap is an awesome framework for the web!

~~~
davidw
I'll take the time to say thanks too, since they seem to be following this.

We've long had lots of open source infrastructure like Linux, Rails, Postgres,
Apache, and so on and so forth that was very much a "by programmers, for
programmers" affair. It's very nice to get some "design" infrastructure -
Bootstrap has made my sites look a lot better, and I get compliments from
people.

So, a big thanks to the bootstrap guys!

------
instakill
Not sure how I feel about the swearing on the page.

~~~
RaphiePS
Why does it matter?

~~~
shantanubala
There are some work environments where using "shit" and "fuck" would be a
turn-off -- not all places are very relaxed about that stuff.

On a more personal note, it feels immature -- titling a section "Oh shit what"
just for the sake of irony dilutes the meaning of what they're conveying. The
info would be equally effective without it, and it's just filler.

I know people just want to have fun, but why not save the swearing for
personal blog posts rather than a large (and growing) open source project?

~~~
blowski
I agree, it's gratuitous. Anyone with a swear filter (families, corporates)
can't look at the documentation, and religious organisations may feel
uncomfortable.

Being open source, perhaps there's a fork opportunity for 'Bootstrap without
the swearing'.

~~~
logn
VelcroStrip?

~~~
sc00ter
Or keep the name Bootstrap for the fork, and rename this JockStrap?

------
frisco
Why the dropping of support for submenus? I find those really useful and it
would be a pain to have to patch them back in.

~~~
perry5000
Agreed. These are sorely needed for enterprise apps.

~~~
wildchild
+1. Enterprise still on the way.

------
ddoolin
Bootstrap 3 will be mobile-first? Didn't they say they had NO plans to make
Bootstrap mobile-first?

Interesting.

~~~
markdotto
I don't ever recall saying that, but if I did, I'm happy to have been wrong.
Super stoked about the direction we're going.

~~~
aleem
I am not sure what "mobile first" means, could you please explain what that
means for the end-developers?

The only thing to that effect I see right now is that responsive less files
will no longer be separate from the core. That will probably mean that I will
be forced to support mobile platforms.

Is there more to it?

(Aside, wishing someone would take a deeper look at
<https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/issues/4935>)

~~~
ceejayoz
Why on earth would that mean you'd be forced to support mobile platforms?

~~~
aleem
That should have read "forced to deal with mobile platforms".

I currently have scenarios where I want the same version on the desktop and
mobile. That's trivial because I simply don't include the responsive CSS file.

In 3.0 the media queries are part of the core. So I can't just leave the
responsive CSS out. Further, it's mobile-first so things like the navbar would
be collapsed by default on a mobile device. I would be forced to negate that
to get an uncollapsed navbar on a mobile device (as desktop version).

~~~
DevoAKA
But the point of mobile-collapsing navigation on mobile devices is for a
better user experience. Why would you go out of your way to ignore that right
away? And if you really didn't want it, you could always remove those lines of
code from your file. Or comment them out so it's there when you revert.

------
jdorfman
Now up on bootstrapcdn.com

------
dotborg
_Replace all CSS transitions with JavaScript transitions._

why?

~~~
fat
I'll probably write up something at length about this decision when/if it
happens… but this is the current thinking:

CSS transitions are just total shit to deal with in javascript.

What people often don't realize is that there is an event for transitionEnd in
javascript – but this isn't always fired in a reliable way – only when a
transition successfully ends (which isn't all the time).

This is _incredibly_ problematic because often really important functionality
is tied to the completion of transitions.

Because these functions never finish, sometimes you're left with dead dom
nodes or weird incomplete states.

What's more, there isn't a performance benefit to using css transitions – the
benefit is that they were suppose to be make transitions easier and provide a
nice separation of style from logic – but they end up being incredibly more
difficult and because of the necessary fallback logic, the styles end up
leaking back into your logic anyways. It's a pain in the neck :/

With bootstrap we really just want to give everyone the most reliable product
we can, and css transitions just aren't that.

Also, from what I hear, the spec is basically dead in the water – and a
reliable cancel event isn't in the works (unless this has changed in the last
month or so)… which is more of a reason to consider alternatives.

Most likely we will end up going with some sort of combination. CSS
transitions when we don't need a reliable "complete" event – and css
transitions when we don't really care (though this case is becoming more
infrequent).

~~~
jameswyse
Thanks for taking the time to explain this fat, I had noticed problems with
transitionEnd sometimes not firing but never got around to researching it.

------
hayksaakian
Unless you really need the changes in 2.3 I'd wait until 3 before jumping into
a new bootstrap.

------
meerita
I am using the 3.0 branch without problems. I don't know why they don't merge
it.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
I'm working on a bootstrap 3 based project and tracking their development.
They've been making fairly large changes (e.g. badges are gone, replaced with
counters, labels are MIA as well but they're supposedly coming back) over the
last month or so and have more to make on their roadmap.

If you're not having any problems you must be very lucky and/or are only using
a subset of the tools they provide, it's not going to be a drop in update for
most people, hence the 3.0 version.

------
circa
i love the fact that the blog post contains "oh shit what"

------
ChikkaChiChi
Bootstrap allows developers to prototype something that looks good enough for
production use without having to worry about a lot of the minutiae of layout.

For that, I will always looooooooooooooove yoooooooooooooouuuuuuuu
ooooooooooooh Iiiiiiiiiiii will always loooooooooove yooooooooooooouuuuuuuu.

Thank you.

