Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Try a lighter version of the auth scaffolding.
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
taylorotwell committed Jan 9, 2015
1 parent ce20ef2 commit 359af29
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 83 changed files with 14,595 additions and 5 deletions.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion config/auth.php
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@
*/

'password' => [
'email' => 'emails.auth.password',
'email' => 'emails.password',
'table' => 'password_resets',
'expire' => 60,
],
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion gulpfile.js
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -12,5 +12,5 @@ var elixir = require('laravel-elixir');
*/

elixir(function(mix) {
mix.sass('app.scss');
mix.less('app.less');
});

9 comments on commit 359af29

@russweas
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍 So kinda like before just more light weight. Just wondering why from sass to less? Not complaining just wondering.

@stuarthannig
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same curiosity here. I am under the presumption that Sass is adopted higher in the developer community because of the preprocessing benefits, whereas designers use Less because of the front-end processing requirement. Is it because Bootstrap ships with Less rather than Sass?

@jahvi
Copy link

@jahvi jahvi commented on 359af29 Jan 14, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Bootstrap has an official sass version as well so maybe it was something else.

@LavaToaster
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Regardless of sass vs less I don't think bootstrap should be included in the repo by default anyway. It would be better imported through bower.

@stuarthannig
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Valid, albeit the class names used are following the TWBS names. But I could see the benefit of bug fixes that might roll out in that framework automatically carrying over easier..

@jahvi
Copy link

@jahvi jahvi commented on 359af29 Jan 15, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wish they just left out the example auth/registration functionality and just provide a basic installation screen with meaningful information, kind of like what rails does.

@gnanakeethan
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Guys, the bootstrap is not going to function normally, the Glyphicons are not working because of relative path as well.

@stuarthannig
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the auth/registration, I'm fine with that.

@Julusian
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@taylorotwell why has bootstrap been included like this? any reason not via bower or npm?

Please sign in to comment.