I know it isn't really a big thing, but this is really going to cramp my style:
"Instead of .span and .offset, we're now using .col-span- and .col-offset-."
I can blaze through views using .row & .span in HAML, not so much now. I envision tons of personal errors in the short term as I transition projects to BS3.
Issue #3 [This is under the modal section...] This sounds like a bad idea, I personally don't have an ios3/4 device handy, but someone should be on that for something as big as bootstrap:
"Test on iOS5. Not sure if we need to go older, but I want to check here to see how well fixed is supported."
"Glyphicons Halflings are normally not available for free, but an arrangement between Bootstrap and the Glyphicons creators have made this possible at no cost to you as developers. As a thank you, we ask you to include an optional link back to Glyphicons whenever practical."
I didn't think fontawesome was around when bootstrap started, but I'd think now it'd be better to bundle fontawesome instead - more icons and they're scalable; that's been my experience of why FA>GI.
Glyphicons provides a special license for bootstrap.
I assume the publicity/business that bootstrap drives to glyphicons must be well worth giving away part of their paid product.
Comments
I know it isn't really a big thing, but this is really going to cramp my style:
"Instead of .span and .offset, we're now using .col-span- and .col-offset-."
I can blaze through views using .row & .span in HAML, not so much now. I envision tons of personal errors in the short term as I transition projects to BS3.
===========
Issue #2, does anyone know why Glyphicons won out over Font Awesome? ( http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/ ) Isn't Glyphicons only free in .png? I'm kinda confused about how the licensing works here: http://glyphicons.com/
===========
Issue #3 [This is under the modal section...] This sounds like a bad idea, I personally don't have an ios3/4 device handy, but someone should be on that for something as big as bootstrap:
"Test on iOS5. Not sure if we need to go older, but I want to check here to see how well fixed is supported."
About Glyphicons
From Bootstrap docs (http://twitter.github.io/bootstrap/base-css.html#icons):
"Glyphicons Halflings are normally not available for free, but an arrangement between Bootstrap and the Glyphicons creators have made this possible at no cost to you as developers. As a thank you, we ask you to include an optional link back to Glyphicons whenever practical."
Font Awesome's license makes it effectively free:
http://fortawesome.github.io/Font-Awesome/license/
The Font Awesome licence is much better (permissive) than the Glyphicons one.
I didn't think fontawesome was around when bootstrap started, but I'd think now it'd be better to bundle fontawesome instead - more icons and they're scalable; that's been my experience of why FA>GI.
Glyphicons provides a special license for bootstrap. I assume the publicity/business that bootstrap drives to glyphicons must be well worth giving away part of their paid product.
I am using Bootstrap and FontAweosme for my website... there should not be any license problem by using them both.
Wow that is a terrible change, I hope they back that out.