On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Huw Wilkins<huw.wilkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Launchpadders,
In Dublin I spoke briefly about LESS CSS ( http://lesscss.org/). There were
positive noises then and I now want to make a decision about whether we
adopt it.
As a recap, with LESS you can do things like variables, class inheritance
(with optional parameters - called mixins), maths (useful for spacing,
widths etc.) and a bunch of other useful things.
One of the great things with LESS is that you can just write standard CSS
and use whatever LESS features you want, if or when you want them (this is
quite the opposite of something like coffeescript which is essentially a
whole new language). Should we ever change our mind the process of removing
LESS and rewriting our CSS would be trivial.
LESS can be compiled server side or rendered client side by a JS file that
is included on the HTML page. As we already have a compile step it should be
straight forward to include LESS in that process.
Personally I am in favour of using LESS. I have used it on some personal
projects and found it very helpful. Repetition of code is one of CSS's big
issues and LESS helping you define things once.
Let me know your thoughts, otherwise I will look at implementing this soon.
Cheers,
Less looks quite nice.
Implementation wise we don't have node.js on the servers at the
moment. I suggest testing it and if its fast enough in 'client side
mode' just using that for now (perhaps file a high priority bug for us
to permit server side handling in the future).
