-
People are being very glib about how 'simple' it is for a project to 'just' make a breaking SassCSS upgrade 'when they are ready' – ignoring that one of the long-standing (~15yr) core features of Sass is *the ecosystem* of tools, plugins, & frameworks.Permalink On twitter.com
♻️ 4 Retweets ❤️ 37 Favorites Mood 0
-
Recently, Sass had to deprecatePermalink On twitter.com
/for math. The migration was extremely 'simple' - but took our team several months of significant effort, blocking projects in the meantime, because one internal tool used/in one place. And the fix required Sass modules, a bigger migration. -
Now consider how much of the web is using tools like Sass Bootstrap, and other massive Sass libraries & design systems. Teams don't always have the luxury to 'just' run a quick migration, or 'just' sit on an old version – especially when the change is required for modern CSS.Permalink On twitter.com
-
(I'm not interested replies that blame authors for using tools, or suggest it's easy actually, or claim a ~15yr project used by millions is a fading trend… We can disagree on what level of author hardship is 'worth it' for a breaking change – but do not dismiss that hardship.)Permalink On twitter.com
-
People really not understanding what Sass is. As though it's become the backbone of open-source CSS by providing a 'temporary polyfill' for custom props & nesting, soon to be 'obsolete'. Client- & server-side languages serve different functions. One will never replace the other.On twitter.com
-
Sass is very different, & on a larger scale than most CSS tools. Natalie won't even consider features that might become redundant in the next ~10yrs. This is a server-side companion language, meant to grow with CSS over the long term. That care & longevity has been proven.Permalink On twitter.com