4 ms·

I clicked through all of the examples, and I would never use any of these components. They are very plain, they don't provide much functionality, and the functi

I clicked through all of the examples, and I would never use any of these components. They are very plain, they don't provide much functionality, and the functionality they provide is lackluster ( unappealing ). As others here have stated, I also couldn't tell if some of the examples are even working or not; they are that bad. If you are looking for a fine set of interworking components that provide a refined look and feel along with nice examples of the options provided; then you'll probably want to look at one of the other 30 or so UI widget sets.

api 12y ago
Good. Its not just me. I almost wonder if this was a draft site never intended for release and someone mistakenly or prematurely posted it.
potch 12y ago
Hey, Brick project member here. Completely agreed, the styling for these components is not where it needs to be. We're a small team that works in the open, and like to ship.
- neves 12y ago
  You just have one chance to make a first impression. I also didn't understand why we need a new collection of UI widgets. What you bring to the table
  - fuzzywalrus 12y ago
    Outside of using Gulp JS and Stylus, I don't really see much of a point myself either, but where it gets interesting is the structure. Example: https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-menu/blob/master/index.html https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-menu/blob/master/index.htm... It looks like the library is pre-pended with a bunch of brick elements, based off its Minimal-markup Web Components. They really do a bad job of explaining this on their brick page as right now, looking at it you'd assume its just yet-another-front-end-framework. Its not compelling (yet), but still of interesting. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/08/introducing-brick-minimal-markup-web-components-for-faster-app-development/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/08/introducing-brick-minimal-...
- wpietri 12y ago
  I'm a big fan of "ship early, ship often", but you have to set expectations properly. If something is not ready for prime time, you should signal that. Call it v 0.7, say it's a beta, label it as a "labs" product. Say up front where the known weaknesses are, and say what audience you want. I also strongly recommend working with a small, carefully selected audience to begin with. Typically only a small percentage of your eventual audience will put up with the rough edges of a work in progress. Getting the average audience member involved early on is frustrating for both sides. You get a lot of feedback on things you a) already know about, and b) are intentionally avoiding for now. And they waste a bunch of time on stuff that wasn't intended for them.
  - arenaninja 12y ago
    Honestly, I thought it was obvious that the entire thing is probably alpha or thereabout
    - magpi3 12y ago
      The "Brick 2.0" version number says otherwise. I agree with the parent post. Version numbers say a lot about waht a user can expect. They should change this to 0.2.
  - sp332 12y ago
    Good points, just thought I'd mention that Mozilla Labs shut down a while ago.
    - Lerc 12y ago
      Did they? Seems like something they should mention on https://mozillalabs.com https://mozillalabs.com No-one to turn out the lights?
      - sp332 12y ago
        Yeah. http://www.ianbicking.org/blog/2014/09/professional-transitions.html http://www.ianbicking.org/blog/2014/09/professional-transiti... "It’s a little hard to tell – I guess we didn’t actually shutter anything, and though it was announced internally it is entirely unclear externally. But Mozilla Labs is definitely shut down."
tonyplee 12y ago
Agree, personally, I still prefer JQuery. Most of the components in here are implemented in JQ already. JQ has a lot more other components and is cross platforms on all the browsers.
Kaihuang724 12y ago
I agree, there needs to be more work done with this before release. At this stage, I have no use for any of these components and would rather build my own or use an alternative UI library.

api 12y ago

Good. Its not just me. I almost wonder if this was a draft site never intended for release and someone mistakenly or prematurely posted it.

potch 12y ago

Hey, Brick project member here. Completely agreed, the styling for these components is not where it needs to be. We're a small team that works in the open, and like to ship.

neves 12y ago
You just have one chance to make a first impression. I also didn't understand why we need a new collection of UI widgets. What you bring to the table
- fuzzywalrus 12y ago
  Outside of using Gulp JS and Stylus, I don't really see much of a point myself either, but where it gets interesting is the structure. Example: https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-menu/blob/master/index.html https://github.com/mozbrick/brick-menu/blob/master/index.htm... It looks like the library is pre-pended with a bunch of brick elements, based off its Minimal-markup Web Components. They really do a bad job of explaining this on their brick page as right now, looking at it you'd assume its just yet-another-front-end-framework. Its not compelling (yet), but still of interesting. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/08/introducing-brick-minimal-markup-web-components-for-faster-app-development/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/08/introducing-brick-minimal-...
wpietri 12y ago
I'm a big fan of "ship early, ship often", but you have to set expectations properly. If something is not ready for prime time, you should signal that. Call it v 0.7, say it's a beta, label it as a "labs" product. Say up front where the known weaknesses are, and say what audience you want. I also strongly recommend working with a small, carefully selected audience to begin with. Typically only a small percentage of your eventual audience will put up with the rough edges of a work in progress. Getting the average audience member involved early on is frustrating for both sides. You get a lot of feedback on things you a) already know about, and b) are intentionally avoiding for now. And they waste a bunch of time on stuff that wasn't intended for them.
- arenaninja 12y ago
  Honestly, I thought it was obvious that the entire thing is probably alpha or thereabout
  - magpi3 12y ago
    The "Brick 2.0" version number says otherwise. I agree with the parent post. Version numbers say a lot about waht a user can expect. They should change this to 0.2.
- sp332 12y ago
  Good points, just thought I'd mention that Mozilla Labs shut down a while ago.
  - Lerc 12y ago
    Did they? Seems like something they should mention on https://mozillalabs.com https://mozillalabs.com No-one to turn out the lights?
    - sp332 12y ago
      Yeah. http://www.ianbicking.org/blog/2014/09/professional-transitions.html http://www.ianbicking.org/blog/2014/09/professional-transiti... "It’s a little hard to tell – I guess we didn’t actually shutter anything, and though it was announced internally it is entirely unclear externally. But Mozilla Labs is definitely shut down."

tonyplee 12y ago

Agree, personally, I still prefer JQuery. Most of the components in here are implemented in JQ already. JQ has a lot more other components and is cross platforms on all the browsers.

Kaihuang724 12y ago

I agree, there needs to be more work done with this before release. At this stage, I have no use for any of these components and would rather build my own or use an alternative UI library.