Updating Bootstrap for 3.1

[Michael Babker]

Hi everyone,

As you're aware, the CMS is currently shipping with Bootstrap 2.1.  Today, they released version 2.3.  So, obviously, we're a bit behind the times.  Is there interest in the community in updating the CMS at least to the latest 2.2 release, if not 2.3, so that it can be included in the beta release scheduled for February 25?  If so, please use this thread as a means of coordinating to get this accomplished.

[Andrew Eddie]

I think it would be wise to keep as up to date as possible. I'm happy to help test.

Regards,

Andrew Eddie

[Bakual]

I'd say upgrade at least to 2.2, better 2.3. Especially the new text alignment classes could be handy.

[Beat]

Agree, keep up to date to minimize steep steps and making decision to upgrade always harder as time passes.

Plus 2.3 brings some (important for Joomla) accessibility improvements (e.g. https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6441 ) and better tooltips, and bug-fixes.

Best Regards,

Beat

http://www.joomlapolis.com/

[ghazal]

+1 for an update to 2.3 bootstrap version

[Nick Savov]

Just as along as it can be upgraded in a backward compatible manner.
Also, I might be mistaken, but I think JBS has done a lot of bug fixes
directly to Bootstrap's code in certain cases, so that has to be accounted
for as well.

Kind regards,
Nick

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>

[Andrew Eddie]

Have those bug fixes been passed back upstream (to the Bootstrap project)?

Regards,
Andrew Eddie
http://learn.theartofjoomla.com - free tutorials and videos on Joomla development

[Roberto Segura]

We had to patch bootstrap JS to avoid conflicts with Mootools.

It's an easy patch and can be applied to latest version.

The bug was reported to bootstrap but they rejected to consider it because it only happens when Mootools and bootstrap are loaded together.

If we are going to update bootstrap I'd use the latest version 2.3.

We also have to start considering how are we going to face the backwards break in bootstrap 3.0

--

[Andrew Eddie]

On 10 February 2013 09:21, Roberto Segura <rob...@phproberto.com> wrote:

We had to patch bootstrap JS to avoid conflicts with Mootools.

It's an easy patch and can be applied to latest version.

The bug was reported to bootstrap but they rejected to consider it because it only happens when Mootools and bootstrap are loaded together.

Fair enough. Thanks.

[Christophor S. Wilson]

Yes, I would also like to see Bootstrap 2.3 support added in Joomla! 3.1, it keeps the CMS up-to-date.

[Bakual]

Roberto said there was only small changes related to compatibility with MooTools. So this shouldn't be a big issue to apply these changes again to 2.3.

We're talking here about Bootstrap 2.3, which is a release to bugfix and improve our included version. It should be completely backward compatible. I don't see any reason to not include bugfixes and improvements.

I think Bootstrap 3 is something which can (and probably will) be considered for Joomla 4.0, as it will break backward compatibility. It will not happen for Joomla 3.x.

Am Montag, 11. Februar 2013 18:48:43 UTC+1 schrieb Constantin Romankiewicz:

Two questions in concern to this:
Is a Bootstrap upgrade / update possible without bringing up issues we already solved, having to do major code changes and to adapt it again to Joomla?

And does it make sense always to integrate the newest Bootstrap version, when a new one is released? Or is the question here only whether to upgrade to Bootstrap 2.3 or 3 and to "stop" there?

[Nick Savov]

As far as I'm aware, there have been a lot of other non-mootools related
changes to our Bootstrap code. That being said, I wasn't the one to labor
over them (other than testing some of them), so I don't have a list or
even a guess. JM's probably the best person to weigh-in on about how much
has been changed so far.

It might be better for us to simply pick and choose what we want:
https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/issues?milestone=18&state=closed
https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342

I know it would be really discouraging to many of our volunteers to have
all their bootstrap fixes over the last 6 months wiped out, many of which
the 2.3 release of bootstrap probably doesn't fix.

We definitely need more information before coming to a conclusion on this.

Kind regards,
Nick

[infograf768]

Folks,
I have no opposition to move to 2.3 for 3.1 or 3.2.
As a non-specialist of bootstrap, I have no idea what is exactly changed in 2.3.
I suggest that a specific branch be created and that ALL aspects of this change be thoroughly tested before merging.

This may mean also some changes in libraries (some should already be done as the use of <i /i> that should be changed to <span>) and most of all RTL, as we totally built RTL from scratch.

Consequences on Hathor and core site templates, coordination with 3pd template designers is also compulsory.
So the main question is: who is going to check all this? This is an enormous task IMHO. We need volunteers and not only observers.

Regards

[elin]

@Nick

If you look at this

https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/commits/master/media/jui/js

you can see there are very few changes to bootstrap itself and they are well documented.  It's not any different than when the CMS has to fix the platform, the main thing is that when you update you need to carefully make sure that if your fixes have not been fixed or if they are very custom then you do them over again.  But having a commit history let's you manage that.  

The harder part is actually places where workarounds have been done outside of bootstrap itself.

A big plus one from me since our experience is that the longer you wait the harder is it to update.  I also don't think it makes any sense to say now that you won't update to a specific future version ... that will be insanely frustrating to developers and designers if for 3 years they cannot new features.  What we need to start thinking about is how to manage that update in a way that does not break b/c.  Hopefully the bootstrap people have learned from watching the experiences of other javascript frameworks that did not care about that.  

We should especially be trying to integrate all accessibility improvements since loss of accessibility-by-default is the one real regression in the 3 series.

Elin

[Nick Savov]

+1 , thanks JM and Elin!

Cheers,
Nick

>> I suggest that a specific branch be created and that *ALL aspects of
>> this
>> change be thoroughly tested before merging.*

>>
>> This may mean also some changes in libraries (some should already be
>> done

>> as the use of <i /i> that should be changed to <span>) a*nd most of all
>> RTL, as we totally built RTL from scratch.*

>>
>> Consequences on Hathor and core site templates, coordination with 3pd
>> template designers is also compulsory.
>> So the main question is: who is going to check all this? This is an
>> enormous task IMHO. We need volunteers and not only observers.
>>
>> Regards
>>

>> Le mardi 12 f�vrier 2013 09:35:38 UTC+1, Nick Savov a �crit :

[brian teeman]

Not sure why but as you know protostar does not include the bootstrap css files only the js . Will  the template.css for the protostar template  be updated as well. I would have thought it should be using the bootstrap css from the media folder anyway and just have a custom css file for any changes specific to the protostar template. But I'm not a designer so maybe there is a good reason for it being the way it is - just seems odd to me

>> Le mardi 12 f�vrier 2013 09:35:38 UTC+1, Nick Savov a �crit :

[Matt Thomas]

I found this confusing too. Isn't the idea of using bootstrap that every extension use the same files? I do understand that combining them into one file can provide performance benefits, but many people copy core extension code to learn from. In this case, you can't do a wholesale upgrade of bootsrap.

Learning from core code is the reason I still say core extensions should include method="upgrade" in their manifest files, but that's a topic for another thread ;-)

Best,

Matt Thomas
Founder betweenbrain™
Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework
Phone: 203.632.9322
Twitter: @betweenbrain
Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain

Composed and delivered courtesy of Nexus 7.

[elin]

No, every templater can start with  the same base files  and they can copy the bootstrap file to start if they want and it will be a solid start that makes sense for Joomla,  but they make their own. We just supply that file as a convenience so you have the basics already and you don't need to go to the bootstrap site and build your own.  Do a diff of what's in the protostar file versus what's in the jui file.

Elin

[brian teeman]

But dont you have the basics already in the JUI ?

[elin]

No .. Bootstrap uses LESS so that basic file is then compiled with your changes, and you get a whole new clean file instead of doing the same CSS twice like you often do in a custom.css file.  In my opinion, a custom.css file still makes sense for beginning users who want to just make a few small changes especially if they are fixing up something in a module they may have installed or similar, but  experienced users should be compiling.  

Elin

[Michael Babker]

When the template CSS is compiled, they use the same core LESS files to build a common CSS.  Those LESS files have a bunch of variables that allow designers to quickly customize numerous aspects (see https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/master/templates/protostar/less/variables.less for the variables file used in Protostar).  When we run the compiler, the compiler uses https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/master/templates/protostar/less/template.less to build the CSS files.  As you can see, the same base library of LESS files are used in the JUI library, which is (99%) unaltered from the Bootstrap source.  The template.less file also includes our custom CSS for the template.  I guess you could call this the advanced route.

We also ship the stock Bootstrap CSS files.  This allows developers and designers to quickly import Bootstrap without customizations, then they can further customize in their own stylesheets.  Pretty much how things were in 2.5 and earlier, for a lack of better comparison.  If the above is the advanced route, this would be the beginner route.

Using LESS is actually very beneficial to us.  For example, with Hathor, we ship 4 color schemes with fairly identical CSS aside from the colors being different.  In 2.5 and earlier, we had to modify each CSS file to make our changes.  Now, we modify one LESS file and run our compiler, and those changes are made to all the CSS files.

>> Le mardi 12 fï¿1Ž2vrier 2013 09:35:38 UTC+1, Nick Savov a ï¿1Ž2crit :

[Michael Babker]

All the templates are using the same LESS files to generate their CSS.  The awesome thing about Bootstrap is that you only need to modify one "main" LESS file from their library to customize their elements, the variables.less file.  The way we're set up, we compile our CSS from their LESS files, which are almost intact (maybe one or two small tweaks, I don't remember off the top of my head).  This allowed us to easily replace their Glyphicon set with Icomoon for our icon set.

So, everyone's using similar HTML markup and should compile using the LESS files in the media/jui folder.  But, designers are encouraged to customize as well via the variables.less file and add custom styles as we did in our template.less file (see the links in my response to Brian).

From: Matt Thomas <ma...@betweenbrain.com>
Reply-To: <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>
Date: Thursday, February 14, 2013 6:51 AM
To: <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [jcms] Re: Updating Bootstrap for 3.1

>> Le mardi 12 fï¿1Ž2vrier 2013 09:35:38 UTC+1, Nick Savov a ï¿1Ž2crit :

[Seth Warburton]

Is anyone planning yet for a move to Bootstrap 3.x? Is there a roadmap for this?

As a rapidly evolving framework there are a lot of improvements and it would really be a shame if Joomla didn't keep up with those. Keeping up to date with the incremental changes is (as we all know) far easier than jumping a couple of versions for J4.x.

Best,

Seth

[Mark Dexter]

If it is backward compatible, I don't see why couldn't do this for 3.2 in September. Mark

--

[Victor Drover]

+1 Mark

[Angie Radtke]

Hi,

we should think about a solution to make us a little bit more independent,
class-names will be changed .
I think it can be easier to adapt the class names in the
bootstrap-less-files ( span/cols-span -> jcols ) instead of changing
all the output .


Greatings Angie

--
www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation
Angie Radtke
Witterschlicker Allee 52
53125 Bonn

Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67

----------------------------------------------------

Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
Addison-Wesley,
ISBN-10: 3827328462

[Matt Thomas]

One thing that needs to kept in mind is that not everyone will be using LESS.

Best,

Matt Thomas

Founder betweenbrain™

Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework

Phone: 203.632.9322
Twitter: @betweenbrain

Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain

email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--

www.der-auftritt.de  Büro für Kommunikation

Angie Radtke
Witterschlicker Allee 52
53125 Bonn

Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67

----------------------------------------------------

Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
Addison-Wesley,
ISBN-10: 3827328462

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.

[Angie Radtke]

Hi Matt,

we can add the compiled css as well.
Or is there an issue I do not see?

Angie

> One thing that needs to kept in mind is that not everyone will be using
> LESS.
>
> Best,
>
> Matt Thomas

> Founder betweenbrain <http://betweenbrain.com/>�

> Lead Developer Construct Template Development

> Framework<http://construct-framework.com/>

> Phone: 203.632.9322
> Twitter: @betweenbrain
> Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Angie Radtke <a.ra...@derauftritt.de>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> we should think about a solution to make us a little bit more independent,
>> class-names will be changed .
>> I think it can be easier to adapt the class names in the
>> bootstrap-less-files ( span/cols-span -> jcols ) instead of changing all
>> the output .
>>
>>
>> Greatings Angie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> If it is backward compatible, I don't see why couldn't do this for 3.2 in
>>> September. Mark
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Seth Warburton

>>> <se...@internet-inspired.com>**wrote:

>>>> email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>>>> .
>>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**
>>>> com <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>>>> .
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> --
>> www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

>> Angie Radtke
>> Witterschlicker Allee 52
>> 53125 Bonn
>>
>> Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67
>>

>> ------------------------------**----------------------

>>
>> Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
>> Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
>> Addison-Wesley,
>> ISBN-10: 3827328462
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

>> email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**com<joomla-...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>> .
>>
>>
>>


--
www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

[Michael Babker]

The only thing that worries me about changing the class names in the LESS files is that when we do updates, there's the potential to lose those updates if careful attention isn't paid.  As it is, we already have hacks in the Bootstrap and Chosen JavaScript files.  The more we deviate from what Bootstrap ships, the more difficult clean updates become, and suddenly we find ourselves at a point where we can't use Bootstrap's documentation as a guide for developers on how to use it without modifying that documentation as well.  Obviously, this all comes from a developer's perspective who isn't as well rehearsed in issues about semantic markup and accessibility as you or others who've posted in this thread, but it is something that I think we should keep in mind.

email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--

www.der-auftritt.de  Büro für Kommunikation

Angie Radtke
Witterschlicker Allee 52
53125 Bonn

Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67

----------------------------------------------------

Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
Addison-Wesley,
ISBN-10: 3827328462

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.com.

[Matt Thomas]

Michael brings up a great point. Bootstrap's documentation is one reason why we are using it. This would surely hinder new developers using JUI.

Best,

Matt Thomas

Founder betweenbrain™

Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework

Phone: 203.632.9322
Twitter: @betweenbrain

Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

[Mark Dexter]

@Matt: +1.

As a non-designer (design challenged?) dev, I have found it enormously helpful to be able to go to the Bootstrap site and find the markup I need for the desired widgets. If at all possible, I think we should try to continue to use vanilla Bootstrap markup so we can continue to use the Bootstrap docs. We have enough documentation challenges as it is, without add more imo.

Mark

[Angie Radtke]

Bootstrap3 changes
https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/pull/6342

> @Matt: +1.
>
> As a non-designer (design challenged?) dev, I have found it enormously
> helpful to be able to go to the Bootstrap site and find the markup I need
> for the desired widgets. If at all possible, I think we should try to
> continue to use vanilla Bootstrap markup so we can continue to use the
> Bootstrap docs. We have enough documentation challenges as it is, without
> add more imo.
>
> Mark
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Matt Thomas <ma...@betweenbrain.com> wrote:
>
>> Michael brings up a great point. Bootstrap's documentation is one reason
>> why we are using it. This would surely hinder new developers using JUI.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Matt Thomas

>> Founder betweenbrain <http://betweenbrain.com/>�
>> Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework<http://construct-framework.com/>

>>>>> <se...@internet-inspired.com>**wrote:

>>>>>> email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**
>>>>>> com <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>>>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>>>>>> .

>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> --

>>>> www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

>>>> Angie Radtke
>>>> Witterschlicker Allee 52
>>>> 53125 Bonn
>>>>
>>>> Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67
>>>>

>>>> ------------------------------**----------------------

>>>>
>>>> Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
>>>> Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
>>>> Addison-Wesley,
>>>> ISBN-10: 3827328462
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

>>>> an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>>>> .
>>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**
>>>> com <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>>>> .
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>>> .

>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>>> email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>


--

www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

[Seth Warburton]

Sure, but the big problem with doing it that way is that, as it is rapidly evolving, Bootstrap's markup (and LESS) is in a state of flux.

Latest version is not backward compatible, so we cannot simply drop in the latest Bootstrap build. 

It is for these reasons that I previously suggested de-coupling Bootstrap markup from core html and applying Bootstrap in a semantic (and easily reversible) manner. It would only be possible to use latest Bootstrap and vanilla Bootstrap markup if someone were willing to update all Bootstrap markup that was changed with each update. Some changes are trivial, but others are considerably more challenging.

As I see it, the available options are;

1. Stick with the current Bootstrap build and don't update (stagnate).
2. Update core output markup to match current, and future, Bootstrap updates (maintenance nightmare).
3. De-couple Bootstrap from core outputs to enable updates to either Bootstrap or core markup (forget about Bootstrap docs).

Best, 

Seth

Mark

email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--

www.der-auftritt.de  Büro für Kommunikation
Angie Radtke
Witterschlicker Allee 52
53125 Bonn

Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67

----------------------------------------------------

Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
Addison-Wesley,
ISBN-10: 3827328462

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Seth Warburton]

I'd actually advocate not changing anything in Bootstrap, rather change the way in which it is applied. That would mean that the only possible breaks in compatibility would occur in one place, the template files. This would put the onus on the template developer to ensure that their class names matched the current naming of the version of Bootstrap used by Joomla.

Upgradability, maintainability, and parity with mainstream Bootstrap.

The major problem with this approach of course is that extensions developers would no longer also be designers, and they would have to leave design to the template designer. I know full well that this would be extremely un-popular for developers.

Best, 

Seth

email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--

www.der-auftritt.de  Büro für Kommunikation
Angie Radtke
Witterschlicker Allee 52
53125 Bonn

Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67

----------------------------------------------------

Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
Addison-Wesley,
ISBN-10: 3827328462

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

[Matt Thomas]

Just thinking out loud here... if we went with option #1, would the idea then be to update to the latest Boostrap for every .0 release? That is, we leave it alone until 4.0? I'm certainly not advocating that, but exploring the option.

@Seth, how would you change the way BS is applied? I'm not sure if I fully understand how that would be done (but am certainly intrigued!)

Best,

Matt Thomas

Founder betweenbrain™

Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework

Phone: 203.632.9322
Twitter: @betweenbrain

Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain

[Angie Radtke]

Hi Michael,

I think the documentation is a important point.
The bootstrap docs are great.
But If we take alook at the bootstrap changes (3.0) we will see how deep
that changes affect the joomla core-output.


Bye Angie

> The only thing that worries me about changing the class names in the LESS
> files is that when we do updates, there's the potential to lose those
> updates if careful attention isn't paid. As it is, we already have hacks
> in the Bootstrap and Chosen JavaScript files. The more we deviate from
> what Bootstrap ships, the more difficult clean updates become, and suddenly
> we find ourselves at a point where we can't use Bootstrap's documentation
> as a guide for developers on how to use it without modifying that
> documentation as well. Obviously, this all comes from a developer's
> perspective who isn't as well rehearsed in issues about semantic markup and
> accessibility as you or others who've posted in this thread, but it is
> something that I think we should keep in mind.
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Angie Radtke <a.ra...@derauftritt.de>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> we should think about a solution to make us a little bit more independent,
>> class-names will be changed .
>> I think it can be easier to adapt the class names in the
>> bootstrap-less-files ( span/cols-span -> jcols ) instead of changing all
>> the output .
>>
>>
>> Greatings Angie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> If it is backward compatible, I don't see why couldn't do this for 3.2 in
>>> September. Mark
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Seth Warburton

>>> <se...@internet-inspired.com>**wrote:

>>>
>>> Is anyone planning yet for a move to Bootstrap 3.x? Is there a roadmap for
>>>> this?
>>>>
>>>> As a rapidly evolving framework there are a lot of improvements and it
>>>> would really be a shame if Joomla didn't keep up with those. Keeping up
>>>> to
>>>> date with the incremental changes is (as we all know) far easier than
>>>> jumping a couple of versions for J4.x.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Seth
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, 8 February 2013 23:35:02 UTC, Michael Babker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> As you're aware, the CMS is currently shipping with Bootstrap 2.1.
>>>>> Today, they released version 2.3. So, obviously, we're a bit behind
>>>>> the
>>>>> times. Is there interest in the community in updating the CMS at least
>>>>> to
>>>>> the latest 2.2 release, if not 2.3, so that it can be included in the
>>>>> beta
>>>>> release scheduled for February 25? If so, please use this thread as a
>>>>> means of coordinating to get this accomplished.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>>> "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

>>>> email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>>>> .
>>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**
>>>> com <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>>>> .
>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> --
>> www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

>> Angie Radtke
>> Witterschlicker Allee 52
>> 53125 Bonn
>>
>> Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67
>>

>> ------------------------------**----------------------

>>
>> Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
>> Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
>> Addison-Wesley,
>> ISBN-10: 3827328462
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

>> email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**com<joomla-...@googlegroups.com>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>> .
>>
>>
>>


--
www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

[Bakual]

Looking at the changelog for Bootstrap3, it's quite clear that we can't upgrade to it before Joomla 4.0.

It would probably break all templates built for Joomla 3.x if we implemented Bootstrap3 and adjusted the markup. So I don't think that's an option we should even consider.

>>>>>> email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>

>>>>>> .
>>>>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-dev-cms@googlegroups.**
>>>>>> com <joomla-...@googlegroups.com>.
>>>>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
>>>>>> group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> www.der-auftritt.de  B�ro f�r Kommunikation
>>>> Angie Radtke
>>>> Witterschlicker Allee 52
>>>> 53125 Bonn
>>>>
>>>> Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------**----------------------
>>>>
>>>> Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
>>>> Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
>>>> Addison-Wesley,
>>>> ISBN-10: 3827328462
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

>>>> an email to joomla-dev-cms+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>

[Mark Dexter]

If we stay with the current bootstrap for 3.2 and 3.5 (basically another year) and then look at updating for 4.0, would it be possible to "cherry pick" things that are really good in the new BS and use them in 3.2 and 3.5? Mark

[Michael Babker]

I think we might be able to get up to Bootstrap 2.3 (we're on 2.1 now) and ride out the rest of the J! 3 series.  From there, we can look at how to build a compat layer in to help folks do 3.x/4.x support in templates the same way we try to do compatibility in our PHP libraries.

[Victor Drover]

As a variation on #1 and "cherry picking", can't we have our own flavor of BS? One of the original selling points of using bootstrap was that we could add out own UI elements and such. Don't we have to decouple BS from the current release and maintain our own?

[Angie Radtke]

Am 16.04.2013 21:14, schrieb Victor Drover:
> As a variation on #1 and "cherry picking", can't we have our own flavor of BS? One of the original selling points of using bootstrap was that we could add out own UI elements and such. Don't we have to decouple BS from the current release and maintain our own?
>

That is what I mean.


For example:
now:
.span(@columns) {
width: ((@gridColumnWidth) * @columns) + (@gridGutterWidth *
(@columns - 1)) - 14;
}

bootstrap3:
.col-span-(@columns) {
width: percentage((@columns / @grid-columns));
}

Joomla xx:

.jcols(@columns) {
width: ((@gridColumnWidth) * @columns) + (@gridGutterWidth *
(@columns - 1)) - 14;
}


+ // for BC so long we need

.span(@columns) {
width: ((@gridColumnWidth) * @columns) + (@gridGutterWidth *
(@columns - 1)) - 14;
}


Bye Angie

--
www.der-auftritt.de B�ro f�r Kommunikation

[George Wilson]

Whilst I understand the arguments of backwards compatibility in my opinion we should be updating Bootstrap (and jQuery as the 1.8 vs 1.9 tree is a similar thing) - with each sub release. To be honest I think we'd find more extension developer's/template developers in 3 years time asking why we're still on Bootstrap 2.x rather than moaning about the changes occurring in the 6 monthly release cycle.

If b/c really is that huge an issue - how about an extra parameter be inserted in JHtml for version number for jquery/bootstrap. Then we support 2.3.1 and then have the ability to select the latest version of bootstrap (and keep that updated whatever the B/C issues) so dev's can also be cutting edge.

To keep b/c jQuery and Bootstrap have 1.8/2.2 as the 'latest' and then the parameter can include the latest version (just a simple true/false thing)

Kind Regards,
George

[Bakual]

I think this should be the path to follow. Update to the latest Bootstrap 2.x series to get their bugfixes. This way we should not break anything.

And look for a major upgrade with Joomla 4.0. May it be Bootstrap 3 or 4 or even something else then, who knows.

[Angie Radtke]

We have a rapid HTML and CSS development at the moment.
I have no clue what will happen if we ready with Joomla 4.0, maybe we will have Bootstrap5 at that time.
If we stuck on the old version of bootstrap, we are not up to date anymore.(Webstandards)

All  component dev are building their stuff von the old version. If we wait with changing the bootstrap version much more components will be built  on this old version. And the problem becomes bigger.
Now we have the chance to make them their live easier, if we use joomla-class-names and - for a while - the old onces as well.

If we customize the less-files our lifes will be easier.
We don't have to touch our output, if the bootsrap guys decide to change the names.

I think we have to bring more silence in the development and built a

reliable, accessible framework for all.

Bye Angie

[Bakual]

1. No backward compatibility breaks between 3.0 and 3.5. Updating to next major Bootstrap version is against Joomla policy.
2. The Bootstrap doc is awesome, if you want to do own classes, you have to build a docpage that is equal or better for. Otherwise I would opt strongly against own classes. You could start write a doc about the already existing Joomla classes...

[Andrew Eddie]

On 17 April 2013 05:14, Victor Drover <ad...@anything-digital.com> wrote:

As a variation on #1 and "cherry picking", can't we have our own flavor of BS? One of the original selling points of using bootstrap was that we could add out own UI elements and such. Don't we have to decouple BS from the current release and maintain our own?

That requires people to commit to maintaining it and our flavour of the documentation. Historically that has not been well attended.

I think the question should really be aimed at the extension developers though. At the end of the day, the designers are going to their own thing with the meta structure of the template. The rubber meets the road when the extension developer has to work out what markup they can use for their extension layouts to fit into however the designer has hacked the template to force Bootstrap into submission. With that in mind, maybe you should be thinking about abstracting the layouts with microformats or something (shrug).

I don't know what the right answer is other than to agree that if there are B/C issues, it waits for 4.0.

Regards,

Andrew Eddie

[Mathew Lenning]

I've been following this discussion for a while and thought I'd put my 2 cents in. 

Now I'm not to familiar with bootstrap (I'm a PHP guy) but isn't one of the major benefits of using bootstrap/LESS the ability to use mixins?  

Using the cherry picking example that was posted.

 .span(@columns) { 
       width: ((@gridColumnWidth) * @columns) + (@gridGutterWidth * 
(@columns - 1)) - 14; 
     } 

bootstrap3: 
   .col-span-(@columns) { 
     width: percentage((@columns / @grid-columns)); 
   } 

Joomla xx: 

  .jcols(@columns) { 
       width: ((@gridColumnWidth) * @columns) + (@gridGutterWidth * 
(@columns - 1)) - 14; 
     } 


+ // for BC so long we need 

  .span(@columns) { 
       width: ((@gridColumnWidth) * @columns) + (@gridGutterWidth * 
(@columns - 1)) - 14; 

     }  

couldn't we just create a compatibility layer that defines the old classes using their equivalent replacements?

example:

.span

{

 .col-span();

}

We could then mark the compatibility layer as depreciated and give a Joomla version in which the layer would be removed. This would make the depreciation process work the same way framework. 

Developers would have the freedom to use the new Bootstrap on their current projects and have a deadline for updating their older projects. 

If I'm way off base with this let me know. As I welcome every opportunity learn how to do it better. 

Kanpai! 

[Angie Radtke]

Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Mathew Lenning:
> example:
> .span
> {
> .col-span();
> }

That's what I mean .-)

Bye Angie

[Seth Warburton]

Yes! 100% yes!!

The only difference is that what you think of as a 'compatibility layer' I call a template! Either the template would be built for Bootstrap 2.x or 3.x, for example. It's UI, it should be the domain of the template (IMHO). 

This is exactly what i was advocating in the infamous 'Seth hates Bootstrap and wants to destroy Joomla' thread…

We can use whichever version of Bootstrap is en vogue, drop in another css framework, or not use any framework, by decoupling the markup from the css. No forward-compatibility breaks, stable, independant and standards-based core markup, pain-free updates and freedom of choice to designers. Call me old-fashioned but I still believe that it's template designers, and only template designers, who should be designing. It's the only way to achieve a unified, look and feel; the truly cohesive UI that we all want.

Best, 

Seth

On Wednesday, 17 April 2013 08:24:46 UTC+1, Mathew Lenning wrote:

I've been following this discussion for a while and thought I'd put my 2 cents in. 

Now I'm not to familiar with bootstrap (I'm a PHP guy) but isn't one of the major benefits of using bootstrap/LESS the ability to use mixins?  

 [snip…]

[piotr_cz]

I believe by abstraction Seth means things like JHtml helpers in
component layouts:

For example in Joomla 3.1 to create tabs, you use
<?php echo JHtml::_('bootstrap.addPanel', 'myTab', 'details',
JText::_('COM_CONTACT_NEW_CONTACT')) ?>

and not (as in 3.0):
<li class="active"><a href="#details" data-toggle="tab"><?php echo
JText::_('COM_CONTACT_NEW_CONTACT') ?></a></li>

So if I'd like to use Bootstrap 4/ Foundation/ other framework, I just
have to use JHtml::addIncludePath with JHtml helpers that create
output for this format.

But not everything is written to use JHtml.


Anyway there is backend and frontend. I guess people will start using
Bootstrap 3 in their templates anyways (just like they use Bootstrap
in Joomla 2.5).

The question is how to make it easier for them.

On Apr 16, 8:57 pm, Matt Thomas <m...@betweenbrain.com> wrote:
> Just thinking out loud here... if we went with option #1, would the idea
> then be to update to the latest Boostrap for every .0 release? That is, we
> leave it alone until 4.0? I'm certainly not advocating that, but exploring
> the option.
>
> @Seth, how would you change the way BS is applied? I'm not sure if I fully
> understand how that would be done (but am certainly intrigued!)
>
> Best,
>
> Matt Thomas

> Founder betweenbrain <http://betweenbrain.com/>™

> Lead Developer Construct Template Development

> Framework<http://construct-framework.com/>

> Phone: 203.632.9322
> Twitter: @betweenbrain
> Github:https://github.com/betweenbrain
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Seth Warburton

> <s...@internet-inspired.com>wrote:

> >>>> <se...@internet-inspired.com>**wr**ote:

> >>>>> email to joomla-dev-cm...@**goo**glegroups.com.
> >>>>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.**co**
> >>>>> m.
>
> >>>>> Visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/**group**
> >>>>> /joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
> >>>>> .
> >>>>> For more options, visithttps://groups.google.com/**grou**ps/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
> >>>>> .

>
> >>> --
> >>>www.der-auftritt.de Büro für Kommunikation
> >>> Angie Radtke
> >>> Witterschlicker Allee 52
> >>> 53125 Bonn
>
> >>> Fon: 0228 / 642 04 67
>

> >>> ------------------------------****----------------------

>
> >>> Joomla!-Templates entwickeln:
> >>> Barrierefreie & attraktive Designs von Konzept bis Umsetzung
> >>> Addison-Wesley,
> >>> ISBN-10: 3827328462
>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>> Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

> >>> an email to joomla-dev-cm...@**goo**glegroups.com.
> >>> To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.**co**m.
>
> >>> Visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/**group**
> >>> /joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB<http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB>
> >>> .
> >>> For more options, visithttps://groups.google.com/**grou**ps/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out>
> >>> .

>
> >>  --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
> > To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

[Bakual]

It would work if all templates would dynamically use LESS to build the compiled CSS. But that is not the case. A template which is built today for Joomla 3.0 would not work with Joomla 3.2 since the mixins were not available when it was built. It would be a backward compatibility break.

Also mixins are nice when you look at it in LESS: But as soon as you compile the CSS, you just double the CSS rules and blow up the file. The bootstrap file is already quite big as it is, I don't think we want to blow it up more than needed.

I would say we can think about a solution for Joomla 4.0 which mitigates the (possible) issues we see now. One could already start working on it and build concepts/docs. But I don't see any solution that would fit into the J3.x series. There will always be backward compatibility issues if you completely change a framework.

[Seth Warburton]

No, that's not what I meant. I actually don't want either of those. 

What if the designer doesn't want tabs?

I'm talking about applying Bootstrap (or any other frameworks) UI, to vanilla markup, using mixins. I believe this is what Angie and Matthew are referring to also.

Seth

[Seth Warburton]

It will work perfectly, and continue to do so over successive releases, unless the underlying UI framework (Bootstrap in this case) is updated. If that happens, we can simply update to the latest version of that framework by making changes in one place, and one place only; the template. Compare this with the situation faced currently if we want to update…

Actually, the compiled CSS would be smaller as it would not include any unused code. LESS does have the unfortunate habit of forming new rules for each mixin, unlike Scss which extends the existing rule with additional selectors. *But*, the benefits of maintainability and compatibility of the code base far outweigh (IMO) any repetition in stylesheets (which is largely mitigated by gzipping anyway).

I think, if we are to stick with Bootstrap, we need to use only vanilla Bootstrap and not make *any* changes to that framework. Updating Bootstrap should be as simple is doing a git pull from the official repo.

Seth

[Bakual]

Currently, we can't do a major upgrade on Bootstrap at all. That is what I'm saying. Any discussions about an abstraction layer or whatever would be for Joomla 4.0 where we can do and break again whatever we like.

I agree that we should stick as close as possible to the chosen framework (currently: Bootstrap 2.x). Everything else is just not maintainable and asks for troubles.

About an abstraction layer: We don't really need such a thing. All we need is a defined set of classes and ids extension developers can use to get an expected behaviour. The template designer are then free to use Bootstrap or any other framework to achieve this goal.

Basically that is why we choose Bootstrap, because it gives us these "well-known" CSS classes together with a very good documentation. A template designer can already choose to not use Bootstrap CSS rules as of today, he just needs to provide his own rules to generate an expected result.

Of course we could define our own set of classes, but that means we need to write a documentation about it as well. Personally I don't think we can top what we have with Bootstrap for free.

The Javascript part obviously is a different beast.

[Victor Drover]

Seth, Are you attending JAB13? If so, maybe you could arrange an informal JUX meeting?

[Matt Thomas]

Seth,

I'm very intrigued by what you are proposing. Decoupling core output from Bootstrap, or any framework, would be huge. I think this is a great direction to move in. But... I'm not sure if I fully understand what exactly you're proposing. Can you provide some sort of ad hoc code example?

Best,

Matt Thomas
Founder betweenbrain™

Lead Developer Construct Template Development Framework

Phone: 203.632.9322
Twitter: @betweenbrain
Github: https://github.com/betweenbrain

Composed and delivered courtesy of Nexus 7.

[brian teeman]

On Wednesday, 17 April 2013 11:44:12 UTC+1, Vic Drover wrote:

Seth, Are you attending JAB13? If so, maybe you could arrange an informal JUX meeting?

Been trying to convince Seth to do that - have reserved the time slot

[kisswebdesign]

I like the *idea* of decoupling the ui from the core, because the ui IS really for the template designer to define.

However, I see a couple of problems with this...

1. Without a common, defined, naming convention for CSS component classes (buttons, pills, labels, badges, progress bars, etc) extension developers will be forced back to using their own UI CSS instead of relying on the core or template to provide the relevant, expected, classes.

2. There are lots of extensions and templates that have conformed to the J3 bootstrap way of working, and one of the things that people always complain about is the break in compatibility between major Joomla versions. This is something we should strive to avoid (or minimise at the very least).

A solution, albeit a compromise, as I see it

1. Keep the current Bootstrap 2.x series as the default Joomla styleguide (for now and forever)

2. Keep it in the core, to support what already exisits.

3. Make it optional, with some caveats

3.1 Templates can set a flag to indicate if they will use the default framework (included in the core) or their own framework.

3.1.1 No flag means that the default styling will be used (ie the same as now, nothing changes). Thus ensuring all current templates continue to work, while allowing new templates greater flexibility.

3.2 A template must include a defined naming convention for common component classes

3.2.1 E.g. A button class ".btn"  must be included in the template CSS. In the template there can be other button classes to fit the chosen framework, just make sure that the defined class names are also used.

3.3 The grid system should be framework agnostic.

3.3.1 The current "booststrap size" that adds the class "spanX" to the html is replaced with a generic "columns" option.

3.3.2 The template defines the prefix (or suffix) to use for the grid, blank means use the default core styles.

3.3.3 The html output then matches the framework chosen by the template designer

3.4 The bootstrap JS can be included separately from the bootstrap CSS, or both together.

3.4.1 IF the template has set the flag to use their own framework, only the bootstrap JS is included by a call to include the framework

3.4.2 The template cannot use any JS function names that match the bootstrap.js function names (protected names list)

3.4.2.1 Possibly add a flag to the template for bootstrap.js overrides, allowing the template to define JS function names that match the bootstrap.js function names. It then becomes the templates responsibility to provide all the bootstrap JS functionality for all the extensions.

e.g. if the template wants to use a different modal than the bootstrap one, they set the flag and include a js file that contains not just the 'special' modal code, but also the code for the other 11 bootstrap javascript functions.

Over time no template will use the defaults in the core, but provide their own (using the class names and JS function names defined by Joomla as MUST HAVES)

This will achieve the decoupling of bootstrap from the core, while maintaining a unified ecosystem that both templates and extensions will use. Although it will take time for this to happen, it will allow template designers to design however they want using any framework they want, while extension developers can continue to use common class names and JS calls without having to worry about which framework the template is using.

This does change the core, because it will need to accomodate the abstraction, but the major changes will be to the templates that want to deviate from bootstrap without writing overrides for every (core or 3rd party) component, module, etc that a client may use.

I have re-read this before posting it, and it makes sense to me. However, that may be because I wrote it and have things in my head that has not translated well to text.

Thoughts, comments, etc. all welcomed.

[Nick Savov]

Hi Seth,

You mentioned:
[quote]If that happens, we can simply update to the latest version of that

framework by making changes in one place, and one place only; the

template[/quote]

but who's going to make the changes to the templates of users have have
already started using Joomla 3? Backward compatibility is not simply
about the core, but it's about Joomla's users primarily. We need to
provide backward compatibility in the Joomla 3 series.

+1 on:
[quote]

I think, if we are to stick with Bootstrap, we need to use only vanilla
Bootstrap and not make *any* changes to that framework. Updating Bootstrap
should be as simple is doing a git pull from the official repo.

[/quote]

Kind regards,
Nick

[Nick Savov]

+1

[Amy Stephen]

There aren't any good answers here.

You could completely bundle a Template with all of it's asset requirements (JS/CSS, etc/) and then use semantic versioning to maintain a version specific to the Template.

The downside of that is then what CSS/JS do the extensions use?

You could never update Bootstrap and hold on to BC like a long lost friend.

The downside of that is -- well, we did that already with MT's. Got pretty hard to find any new 1.1 extensions after the version distributed in Joomla was EOL a couple of years before.

You could set a standard to update Bootstrap with every N.0 release and let people know if they want backward compat they need to include the JS/CSS within their template.

To me that's the best of a lot of bad choices.

The only thing worse than sharing software between extensions is not sharing software between extensions.

[Anibal]

In a recent Bootstrap version, they fixed a DropDown button bug (not working in iPhone and iPad):

dropdown JS doesn't work on iPad

https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/issues/2975

http://blog.getbootstrap.com/2012/12/08/bootstrap-2-2-2-released/

Is there an update coming soon?

Regards,

Anibal

[Michael Babker]

When I started this thread, the intent was to pull together a few folks interested in updating our Bootstrap resources for 3.1.  Obviously, that didn't happen, and a lot of other discussion started.  Truth be told, I don't think we can jump from Bootstrap 2.1 to 2.3 within a minor release series (3.1.x), so this'll probably be a chore for the 3.2 release.

 

We need to update our Bootstrap resources, it's bad practice to ship outdated code.  Unless you want a PHP guy doing all the leg work to get us up-to-date, I'd highly suggest that a couple of PHP folks get together with a couple of the front-end folks and work together to get us up-to-date.

 

We recently started a new repo on GitHub for CMS projects like this.  Follow https://github.com/joomla-projects/joomla-cms if interested.  I'll add a branch there later on (update-Bootstrap maybe?) for this task, and interested folks can collaborate from there.

--

[Anibal Sanchez]

Hi Michael,

To understand the task, what has has to be done (beyond a Less compilation)?

Thanks,
Anibal

[Michael Babker]

Updating the various LESS and JS files, markup changes, and ensuring everything still works and functions properly.  Note we do have some modifications in the shipped media (I think one or two LESS files and the bootstrap(.min).js file) to deal with issues in the CMS's operating environment.  I'd assume this is basically no different than if you were using Bootstrap on a static HTML site.

Anibal

--

[George Wilson]

We edited some bootstrap files to add better RTL support I believe - not sure what else was done?

Kind Regards,

George

[Achal Aggarwal]

There was problem with Bootstrap docs. I created an issue and they have fixed it. https://github.com/twitter/bootstrap/issues/7898

I did that one because of bug http://joomlacode.org/gf/project/joomla/tracker/?action=TrackerItemEdit&tracker_item_id=30413
which I think is of considerable priority.

If we are not gonna update Bootstrap in short term release I think we can solve the problem by merging this PR.
https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/pull/1055 (Fix [#30413] calender popup on enter ).

Regards

Achal

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Achal

[Anibal Sanchez]

But ... is there a recipe to build it? ... or is it necessary to compare file by file Joomla-Bootstrap vs pure Bootstrap 2.1.0 ?


Thanks,
Anibal

[Michael Babker]

No special recipe.  For every change to a Bootstrap provided file, they should be clearly marked (I know the changes in bootstrap.js are marked with JUI) so it is clear what we changed.

Thanks,
Anibal

--

[Anibal Sanchez]

I see ..... /* >>> JUI >>> */

bootstrap-responsive.css - 2 changes
bootstrap.css - 1 change
bootstrap.js - 8 changes
modals.less - 1 change
responsive-767px-max.less - 2 changes

I'm going to reproduce the same changes, and check it in Bootstrap v2.3.1.

Thanks,
Anibal

2013/5/16 Michael Babker <michael...@gmail.com>

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/We3gI6Y1zHg/unsubscribe?hl=en-GB.
To unsubscribe from this group and all of its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

[Anibal Sanchez]

To be tested:
https://github.com/anibalsanchez/joomla-cms/tree/bootstrap-2.3.1

Changes are:

1. .modal => div.modal (modals.less and responsive-767px-max.less, 3 changes)
2. bootstrap-dropdown.js, support for hover, 7 changes

bootstrap-collapse.js was already updated.


Thanks,
Anibal

2013/5/16 Michael Babker <michael...@gmail.com>

No special recipe.  For every change to a Bootstrap provided file, they should be clearly marked (I know the changes in bootstrap.js are marked with JUI) so it is clear what we changed.

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/joomla-dev-cms/We3gI6Y1zHg/unsubscribe?hl=en-GB.
To unsubscribe from this group and all of its topics, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

[Roberto Segura]

There is at least one more thing changed to fix a conflict between bootstrap and mootools.

In the old files you can find it searching "hideme". It's just to replace "hide" with "hideme".

I did the patch but never heard about the JUI prefix. So I didn't add it.

Have you finally compared the old supposed version vs that bootstrap standard version?

[Anibal Sanchez]

Hi Roberto,

It seems that it's related with the change in bootstrap-collapse.js, and there's no other change. I've reproduced the change:

      /* >>> JUI >>> */
      /*
      ORIGINAL: this.transition('removeClass', $.Event('hide'), 'hidden')
      */
      this.transition('removeClass', $.Event('hideme'), 'hidden')
      /* <<< JUI <<< */

So, we have:

1. .modal => div.modal (modals.less and responsive-767px-max.less, 3 changes)
2. bootstrap-dropdown.js, support for hover, 7 changes

3. bootstrap-collapse.js, hide x hideme, 1 change

I've added the original Bootstrap files, and the Joomla customized ones, as documentation.

https://github.com/anibalsanchez/joomla-cms/tree/bootstrap-2.3.1/media/jui

Thanks,
Anibal

2013/5/16 Roberto Segura <rob...@phproberto.com>

[Mark Dexter]

We discussed somewhere earlier the possibility of having our changes to bootstrap residing in a separate file and overriding (where needed) the standard bootstrap. This as opposed to actually editing the bootstrap. Is this possible? If so, it would seem to be a better long-term solution. Thanks. Mark

[Anibal Sanchez]

These are minor changes. If it's documented, they are easily applied. DropDown hover could be submitted to Bootstrap.

In the long term, the Mootools conflicts should be resolved implementing jQuery or Mootools. I think this is temporary measure.

Regards,

2013/5/17 Mark Dexter <dexter...@gmail.com>

[Anibal Sanchez]

1. .modal class, OK

2. bootstrap-dropdown.js, support for hover.... the changes do not seem to add nothing new, what's needed is the feature to click on parent menu, I've fixed it in the original file

3. bootstrap-collapse.js, OK

4. Mootools conflict, status buttons disappear, on mouseout Eg star featured article ... ggrrrr ... why mootools is hiding these buttons? If I remove mootools, it works Ok.


Thanks,
Anibal

2013/5/17 Anibal Sanchez <anibal....@gmail.com>

[Roberto Segura]

The JS cannot be done right but the CSS is generated from LESS files so we can override it easily with our own less files. I mean something like:

https://github.com/patrickleet/bootstrap-override-boilerplate

We should do something like that. We don't need to add the git submodule but the LESS will ensure that we can upgrade anytime.

I've already done it to include BS in other systems like prestashop and it's really easy and useful.

For the JS we should ensure that we only add translations. Every bug fix/modification should check if it's reported as bug in the bootstrap github project and if not send it.

[Anibal Sanchez]

Hi Roberto,

Yesterday, Bootstrap published v2.3.2. I've created a new branch with implementation:

https://github.com/anibalsanchez/joomla-cms/tree/bootstrap-2.3.2

This time I've modified the original Makefile to work with the updated mootools compatible files:

Makefile
modals.joomla.less
responsive-767px-max.joomla.less
bootstrap-collapse-joomla.js
bootstrap-dropdown-joomla.js
bootstrap-tooltip-joomla.js

I'm going to work/test a couple of days before creating the pull request.


Thanks,
Anibal

2013/5/17 Roberto Segura <rob...@phproberto.com>

[Anibal Sanchez]

Hi Michael,

This is the pull request to update to the latest Bootstrap 2.3.2:

https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/pull/1166

Please, let me know if it's Ok.

Thanks,
Anibal

2013/5/18 Anibal Sanchez <anibal....@gmail.com>

[Gary Mort]

On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 12:52:38 PM UTC-4, a.radtke wrote:

Hi,

we should think about a solution to make us a little bit more independent,
class-names will be changed .
I think it can be easier to adapt the class names in  the
bootstrap-less-files (  span/cols-span -> jcols ) instead of changing
all the output .

One very nice feature I found with Joomla's implementation of Bootstrap is that by sticking to the Bootstrap defined classnames, you can get a far way to integrating with bootstrap theme developers by doing very little work.

As an example, copy the protostar template and change the ini variables to give it a new name.

Now replace the contents of template.css with any random theme from bootswatch - http://bootswatch.com/

Change your default template to the new template.  Instant and almost complete theme changes with practically 0 work.

Because of the way Joomla! loads CSS and Javascript files[provided you use it's built in API's] - you can actually "upgrade" Bootstrap in Joomla by simply using a template. Place the latest bootstrap JS files in your template's javascript directory and place the bootstrap css code in the template and you will get an instant upgrade to the latest bootstrap.

If class names are changed, then for the most part you can fix that by providing template overrides for the modules/components which use the old class names.

Back with 3.0 the only problematic area I noticed was in the toolbar code....if you use the Bootstrap method of creating toolbar's dynamically with javascript when that code changes you will have things break.  As such, I suggest instead using the method Joomla uses for creating toolbar's dynamically using PHP code on the server - if you do that you are immune to bootstrap script changes.