4 ms·

I don’t really see a problem with this. Every bootstrap project I’ve worked on has entailed lots of nasty and buggy overrides that are hard get your head around

I don’t really see a problem with this. Every bootstrap project I’ve worked on has entailed lots of nasty and buggy overrides that are hard get your head around.

KronisLV 5y ago
The problem is that the people who are onboarded 5 years into your project's development will be lost and will have to waste countless hundreds of hours learning your unmarketable framework. They can't Google how to do something in your framework. They can't find component libraries that extend your framework. They probably can't find sandboxes that demonstrate every single one of your framework's use cases. The documentation of your framework is also likely to be worse than that of frameworks that have had tens of thousands man hours be put in their development and tens if not hundreds of thousands more battle testing them in production across a variety of projects.
- nsonha 5y ago
  It’s not a framework, it’s just css. You are making a design system, which if you use bootstrap you still have to do anyway when reach to that point of scaling your front-end. The difference is instead of having your style in a single language (css) in a cohesive system, you have styles in both css and bootstrap and they often clash.
  - KronisLV 5y ago
    Disagreed, in my entire career so far i've never seen CSS being written completely separately from the components that will use it - there is always strong coupling between how something should work and look. This is done by Bootstrap, Foundation, Materialize and others, the exceptions to this (like Spectre) being the minority. For example, in Bootstrap and other frameworks you'll always have JS components as well, for non-trivial concerns, such as providing carousels, lightbox functionality, tooltips, collapsibles, tabs and so on. Not using any of those will mean having to write your own from scratch, which will only make the aforementioned problems worse. Sure, you could probably figure things out without too many problems if it was just CSS, but it never is. Sure, you'll need custom styling on top of all of those anyways in most cases, but i'd argue that it's harder to screw that up and therefore most teams should just stick to the already tested and established solutions out there, like building atop Bootstrap or others.
    - nsonha 5y ago
      > carousels, lightbox functionality, tooltips, collapsibles, tabs and so on I do want to reuse these, i just dont want to have to override the shitty style that comes with them that clashes with my design anyway. Also bootstrap for example doesnt do all of these so you would have to use yet another 3rd party library on top of bootstrap. Bootstrap is useless to me, but I’m not against component libraries in general.
      - KronisLV 5y ago
        I see! I think we just have differences of opinion/preferences here. Bootstrap does provide most of those: Carousels - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/carousel/ Tooltips - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/tooltips/ Collapsible - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/collapse/ Tabs - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/navs-tabs/ For lightbox functionality, you'd indeed need an external plugin (or just combine modal + responsive image), but i see the fact that such plugins are even available as a plus, since that means being able to download one and start using it, without spending days or weeks developing low level functionality. I think that the difference here is that you seem to prefer to focus on the design part a lot more (which is valid in projects where the brand is front and center), whereas i care more about implementing functionality quickly and prioritize that. For the latter case, Bootstrap works nicely. Probably less so for the former.

I don’t really see a problem with this. Every bootstrap project I’ve worked on has entailed lots of nasty and buggy overrides that are hard get your head around.

KronisLV 5y ago

The problem is that the people who are onboarded 5 years into your project's development will be lost and will have to waste countless hundreds of hours learning your unmarketable framework. They can't Google how to do something in your framework. They can't find component libraries that extend your framework. They probably can't find sandboxes that demonstrate every single one of your framework's use cases. The documentation of your framework is also likely to be worse than that of frameworks that have had tens of thousands man hours be put in their development and tens if not hundreds of thousands more battle testing them in production across a variety of projects.

nsonha 5y ago
It’s not a framework, it’s just css. You are making a design system, which if you use bootstrap you still have to do anyway when reach to that point of scaling your front-end. The difference is instead of having your style in a single language (css) in a cohesive system, you have styles in both css and bootstrap and they often clash.
- KronisLV 5y ago
  Disagreed, in my entire career so far i've never seen CSS being written completely separately from the components that will use it - there is always strong coupling between how something should work and look. This is done by Bootstrap, Foundation, Materialize and others, the exceptions to this (like Spectre) being the minority. For example, in Bootstrap and other frameworks you'll always have JS components as well, for non-trivial concerns, such as providing carousels, lightbox functionality, tooltips, collapsibles, tabs and so on. Not using any of those will mean having to write your own from scratch, which will only make the aforementioned problems worse. Sure, you could probably figure things out without too many problems if it was just CSS, but it never is. Sure, you'll need custom styling on top of all of those anyways in most cases, but i'd argue that it's harder to screw that up and therefore most teams should just stick to the already tested and established solutions out there, like building atop Bootstrap or others.
  - nsonha 5y ago
    > carousels, lightbox functionality, tooltips, collapsibles, tabs and so on I do want to reuse these, i just dont want to have to override the shitty style that comes with them that clashes with my design anyway. Also bootstrap for example doesnt do all of these so you would have to use yet another 3rd party library on top of bootstrap. Bootstrap is useless to me, but I’m not against component libraries in general.
    - KronisLV 5y ago
      I see! I think we just have differences of opinion/preferences here. Bootstrap does provide most of those: Carousels - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/carousel/ Tooltips - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/tooltips/ Collapsible - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/collapse/ Tabs - https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.1/components/navs-tabs/ For lightbox functionality, you'd indeed need an external plugin (or just combine modal + responsive image), but i see the fact that such plugins are even available as a plus, since that means being able to download one and start using it, without spending days or weeks developing low level functionality. I think that the difference here is that you seem to prefer to focus on the design part a lot more (which is valid in projects where the brand is front and center), whereas i care more about implementing functionality quickly and prioritize that. For the latter case, Bootstrap works nicely. Probably less so for the former.