-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 434
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Adding dependency for FontAwesome #26
Conversation
On the other hand, it is possible to use awesome-bootstrap-checkbox with Glyphicons instead of FontAwesome (see last paragraph of the readme), so I wonder if the lack of explicit dependency is intentional. |
Sure. I get that. I was initially confused because there's no mention of FontAwesome in the "Use" section of the readme, and when I loaded the package the font was missing until I noticed it was included in the HTML of your demo. Just trying to help. Thanks for sharing this cool plugin. |
Adding dependency for FontAwesome closes #27
Merged. Thx @sctape, @jimthedev, @Siggen |
👍 thanks for the merge. |
thanks! |
@okendoken that's totally cool. I would still advise updating the readme to better explain the "loose" dependency on FontAwesome. My minor frustration when I tried including this package was that the "Use" section of the readme does not mention including FontAwesome.css. Because of this, I was experiencing problems described in #9. After looking further at the demo file, I noticed the FontAwesome css file being included. Or conversely, make the library use glyphicons by default instead of FontAwesome. Just wanted to help the next person that uses this package avoid my oversight. Thanks again for sharing and maintaining it. |
@okendoken that's right, but we use Font Awesome in main css, sass and less files as DEFAULT font-family. |
I have to agree with @micrum on this one. The current out-of-the-box experience is unclear because although there is an actual dependency in the code, it isn't made explicit in bower. New users get a broken initial experience unless they dig into the code. In my mind, the most sane options are the following. The first and second options would be breaking changes and necessitate a major version bump, but seem ideal from a user perspective: 1. Remove the code that relies upon FA. Favor Glyphicons, the bootstrap default, out of the box Bootstrap users likely aren't expecting font-awesome to be in the code unless there is an actual bower reference to it. Removing FA as the default seems sensible. For a font-awesome specific version, a git hook could be added to automatically publish an alternate, font-awesome specific version to a newly created awesome-bootstrap-checkbox-fontawesome repo. This repo would just have two differences from the main repo. First, font-awesome declared in the bowerfile. Second, Glyphficons styles replaced by their font-awesome counterparts. Think of this as theming. 2. Remove all font-awesome code references and let userland override as needed Users that really want font-awesome can always override the styles. We could even include an alternative css file that they could explicitly include if they want to use FA. Since this is a modification of bootstrap's functionality, I'd propose that this be treated as opt-in. 3. Keep the Font Awesome specific code in and formalize the dependency, since it already exists The original proposal from @sctape. Appreciate you all humoring the discussion. |
In case anyone just wants to get this workin quickly, add this to you code
|
Hey flatlogic,
I tried using your repo and was having trouble not realizing that the FontAwesome package was not being included. I noticed it was not listed as a dependency in bower and there was not an explicit mention of including the file in the readme. I eventually noticed that you were including the font-awesome.css file in your demo.
I made this pull request to hopefully make this more clear for future users of your repo.
Thanks,
Sam