

Bootstrap 3.1 released - rayshan
https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/releases/tag/v3.1.0

======
thatthatis
Bootstrap raised the lowest common denominator from a 2 to about 35. You can
still put together a horrid UI with bad spacing and mismatched fonts, but you
have to go out of your way to get UI quality below 20.

If you have the skills to write 90+ UIs from scratch, you probably get little
out of bootstrap, unless you're rapidly prototyping and need a 65% UI in four
hours.

It's a great tool that improved both the minimum level of the web and the
efficiency with which good UIs can be built.

If you don't need it, that's great, you're a highly skilled specialist. But it
is still an extremely valuable tool for large swaths of the web.

------
ChikkaChiChi
Bootstrap has made my life monumentally easier for developing internal apps,
yet I still feel like something isn't perfect. When developing mobile pages, I
feel that the responsive interface is still not mobile-friendly enough for
CRUD apps.

I've played with RatchetUI (Which has Bootstrap members on the team),
Semantic-UI, and Foundation, but the more-widespread adoption of Bootstrap
keeps dragging me back in.

I guess it can't be all things to all people. I just wish there was a more
widely-adopted mobile-first framework.

~~~
STRiDEX
Defining all 4 screen sizes gets tedious. That aside, The new landing page on
[http://getbootstrap.com/](http://getbootstrap.com/) looks great

~~~
admiraltbags
Great? Looks bland. Anyone else have a weird box sitting under the download
button? [http://i.imgur.com/U5OyI7g.png](http://i.imgur.com/U5OyI7g.png)

~~~
victorhooi
Have you got an ad-blocker running?

I believe that box is meant to be an ad, which the creators of Bootstrap use
to support the project.

~~~
kibibu
I'm getting the same thing and I'm definitely not running an ad blocker.
Chrome 32/OSX, no extensions.

Perhaps the CarbonAds thing is just flaky

------
freshyill
Question: If you were developing a large, content-driven site, would you
bother with Bootstrap?

Bootstrap seemed a bit like overkill when I had to use it in my old job. The
CSS and markup seemed excessive, and the strict JS was kind of a pain to deal
with.

I know I can get something that looks half-decent up and running quickly with
it, but if I'm not planning to take any visual design from it, is there much
of an advantage? Is Bootstrap's grid so great in any way that I really
_should_ be using it?

~~~
owenversteeg
Answer: You wouldn't. Bootstrap's extremely bloated, requires jQuery, and has
a huge (required) JS file. Choose a small, leaner CSS framework, like Min -
only 995 bytes and it is near feature parity with Bootstrap.
[http://minfwk.com](http://minfwk.com)

~~~
stephen_g
How do you define 'near feature parity'? From that page, Min doesn't appear to
have anything like the dropdowns, button groups, tabs, more than half the
navbar options, pagination, progress bars, etc. that Bootstrap has...

It could certainly be useful, but doesn't appear to me to be anywhere close to
feature parity.

~~~
owenversteeg
Min has dropdowns and all of Bootstrap's navbar options. You'll just have to
use the navbar plugin (owenversteeg/min-navbar-plugin) Progress bars,
pagination, and button groups are all coming for Min 2 or Min 2.5, although
demand for them is very low.

If you have a specific feature you'd like implemented, just open an issue.

------
noir_lord
I absolutely adore Bootstrap (and v3 was a big upgrade).

As a primarily backend developer with mediocre at best front end knowledge
(and terrible design sense) it is an absolute joy to work with.

EDIT: Also reading the blog post they moved license to MIT, this makes me a
happy bunny as well.

~~~
kabdib
I've been using Bootstrap 3 for about three months, and to this kernel hacker
new to PHP and web development (for internal apps), it's great. I can do UI
that isn't a total train-wreck; what I come up with ain't perfect, but it gets
the message across.

~~~
ptr
This. But why limit it to internal apps? I do b2b solutions and the services I
write using Bootstrap has higher UX quality than what people there are used
to. Sometimes I just change the background image and keep the default
Bootstrap look.

Also, it's so much fun picking out components and putting them together to
make it looke awesome.

~~~
noir_lord
Have a look (if you haven't already seen it) at the SB-Admin theme (v1 and
v2), v1 in particular is just a very thing wrapper over stock bootstrap (so
much so you can just swap out the core js and css as they get released).

It adds a very dashboard-esque appearance without any bloat.

~~~
ptr
Awesome! Thanks.

------
jcomis
Official Sass port. That's pretty big news.

~~~
ChikkaChiChi
At the expense of not Googling it on my own, can someone provide a quick
rundown of why this is a big deal? What's the difference between Sass and
LESS?

~~~
hackerboos
You can copy existing CSS into a SASS project using SCSS.

~~~
mctx
Or use css2sass.heroku.com for SASS

------
jfc
When are they going to add something like Foundation's block grid? That really
comes in handy. (Note: I use both Foundation and Bootstrap).

Block grid docs -
[http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/block_grid.html](http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/block_grid.html)

~~~
usaphp
Unless I am missing something, but I was able to easily reproduce it with
current bootstrap styles:
[http://jsfiddle.net/MgcDU/8706/](http://jsfiddle.net/MgcDU/8706/)

~~~
mdo
This is exactly why we haven't added it :).

------
gtaylor
As someone who still stinks at basic layouts, the extra examples here are
really helpful: [http://getbootstrap.com/getting-
started/#examples](http://getbootstrap.com/getting-started/#examples)

It's good to see how things are done after all of the bells and whistles have
been stripped away. None of these are beautiful, but they help illustrate
different concepts.

------
ahallock
Love the Sass port. My one complaint with Bootstrap is that its grid system
uses float instead of inline-block. Is it easy to use a different grid system
with Bootstrap without breaking its other components?

~~~
hobonumber1
You should check out Pure's grid system. Works well with Bootstrap.
[http://purecss.io](http://purecss.io)

Disclaimer: I helped write Pure

~~~
jfc
This looks cool. I'm checking it out for an upcoming project.

------
neovive
Official Sass support is great! Looking forward to testing this out on a new
project. Big thanks to the Boostrap team for such an amazing project.

------
simonhamp
Shameless plug: don't forget for totally free promotion of your Bootstrap-
based projects, submit your creations on
[http://builtwithbootstrap.com](http://builtwithbootstrap.com) :)

------
roryokane
The release notes on the Bootstrap Blog are better:
[http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2014/01/30/bootstrap-3-1-0-rele...](http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2014/01/30/bootstrap-3-1-0-released/).
That page gives an overview of the biggest changes, with screenshots, before
listing every change individually. It also mentions a change missing from
GitHub changelog: the release of an official Sass port
([https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-sass](https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap-
sass)).

------
eklavya
It saves just too much time to not be using it. It's a very productive tool.

------
owenversteeg
Personally, I don't like Bootstrap. It's difficult to modify, requires jQuery
and its own massive JS file, and is huge.

Compare that to Min, the extremely small (995 bytes) CSS framework. It has a
Bootstrap to Min converter, has near-feature parity with Bootstrap, and is
very easy to use. [http://minfwk.com](http://minfwk.com)

(Disclaimer: I wrote Min.)

~~~
andyhmltn
>It's difficult to modify The CSS is easy to change IMO. Because you can just
override it. >requires jQuery and its own massive JS file, and is huge. Fair
point on jQuery but you can use the customiser to get rid of most of the JS
you won't use

------
jimaek
Pushed to CDN too
[http://www.jsdelivr.com/#!bootstrap](http://www.jsdelivr.com/#!bootstrap)

~~~
victorhooi
Curious what people's thoughts on using a CDN for these sorts of things
(Bootstrap, JQuery etc) versus deploying it on their own sites.

It's an extra DNS query - but thoughts on overall impact on performance?

~~~
ytjohn
For public facing web site/blogs, everyone using the same CDN might make your
page load faster because there's a good chance a visitor to your site already
loaded it from a CDN. So initially I was all for using NetDNA's CDN (they
maintain all versions, both css and js).

However, over time I revised my opinion. During development, it's usually
nicer to have all your static files associated with the project in your
project directory. There might also be a situation where you're developing
offline (or crappy hotel wifi) and a failed GET just messes up your whole
rhythm.

Additionally, a lot of my work is internal projects. If I'm throwing together
a quick web application, or even just a static site, I use bootstrap's grid,
table classes, and icon packs to make that project look nicer. But I felt that
for a secure application that can only be reached while on our VPN, it didn't
make sense to refer the browser to a piece of javascript running out on the
internet. Even if no malicious tracking code is injected into the js, I don't
need to give this third party server details like
'REFERRER=[https://passwordvault.corp.example.com/?q=jsmith'](https://passwordvault.corp.example.com/?q=jsmith').

------
enos_feedler
I was really hoping they would be able to come up with a simple way to turn
on/off hovering in the distribution (without having to rebuild). Hovering
provides unwanted "sticky" active states on touch-based devices. Given BS3 is
suppose to be mobile-first I am surprised they let this go.

~~~
mdo
Open an issue (with suggestions?) and we'll check it out.

------
andyhmltn
Fairly painless upgrade as well. We are using TWBS 3.0 on an internal admin
system. I just dropped the new bootstrap-sass gem into rails and it was done.
There are a few things that needed to be changed:

1) The button text is now huge 2) For some reason the forms all screwed up
when using a:

<label> Name <input> </label>

Layout

------
isuraed
In the documentation pages they have inexplicably moved the navigation links
to the right side.

~~~
mdo
We'll see how it goes—if enough folks complain, we can revisit :). I wanted
the content to be in the absolute forefront with this update. That meant not
affixing the top navbar and downplaying the side nav. I think it's super
helpful, but again, I'm open to reversing things again if it'd be better for
more folks.

~~~
isuraed
It's almost a web standard that navigation links are on the left.

~~~
Kudos
That's not really an argument, and that isn't standard navigation to begin
with. It's for in-page links and the links highlight as you scroll. I would
argue that it's perfectly intuitive.

------
CSDude
I like bootstrap but padding and margins are way too big, I always reduce them
via .less they provide. Not everyone has retina display. Or it looks very big
still in 1680x1050

~~~
noir_lord
Out of curiosity what do you find a good alternative, I've noticed they are
quite wide myself but never got around to changing it.

------
wise_young_man
The main Bootstrap site has been updated to 3.1 just a bit ago:
[http://getbootstrap.com](http://getbootstrap.com)

------
johnatwork
The main advantages of Zurb was that it was using Sass, now that Bootstrap
uses Sass, I wonder if it will win back some users.

------
nnq
...and they still haven't moved to "sanity" by adding/supporting:

    
    
        * { box-sizing: border-box; }
    

the line that I start all my CSS with nowadays.

Quote from their docs:

> Some third party software, including Google Maps and Google Custom Search
> Engine, conflict with Bootstrap due to * { box-sizing: border-box; }, a rule
> which makes it so padding does not affect the final computed width of an
> element.

~~~
cmicali
They switched to border-box in 3.0.

Note in 3.0 release notes:
[http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2013/08/19/bootstrap-3-released...](http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2013/08/19/bootstrap-3-released/)

Code at top of scaffolding.less:
[https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/master/less/scaffoldi...](https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap/blob/master/less/scaffolding.less)

------
cryowaffle
Thank you Bootstrap team!

------
swalsh
I was playing with this yesterday, what happened to scaffolding?

------
Kiro
> Three new templates: Blog, Cover, and Dashboard.

Where can I see them?

~~~
fudged71
In the examples here, under custom components:
[http://getbootstrap.com/getting-
started/#examples](http://getbootstrap.com/getting-started/#examples)

~~~
amouat
Am I missing something, or do they minify the example code? Why do they do
that? Is there an easier to copy/edit version somewhere?

~~~
ereckers
I think Bootsrap is minified, but the HTML and custom CSS for each example is
available.

~~~
amouat
I phrased it badly when I said "minified". The HTML is available, but it's not
nicely formatted - all the whitespace is gone etc. I understand this saves a
few bytes but it makes life harder for anyone that tries to edit it.

It seems so strange to me that no-one else is complaining that I wonder if a
nicely formatted version is available and I'm being stupid.

EDIT: This seems to have changed! Either I did something really stupid before
or they have updated the HTML for the examples.

~~~
mdo
We've not changed anything. Unsure what you saw, but the examples' HTML has
never been minified.

~~~
amouat
The examples seem fine now. But I swear it was different last week - I can't
have hallucinated adding indentation to an example file for a demo website
last week! I really don't understand what happened as no-one else seems to be
complaining...

------
bricss
TWBS, you've made my day!

------
pearjuice
Meanwhile: youmightnotneedbootstrap.com

~~~
bricss
Meanwhile: drunk?

~~~
gberger
It's a reference to
[http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/](http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/)

