Switch to jQuery slim version.

[XhmikosR]

We don't use the extra features the normal build has.

See https://blog.jquery.com/2016/06/09/jquery-3-0-final-released/

/CC @cvrebert @hnrch02 @dmethvin for thoughts.

[cvrebert]

👍

[hnrch02]

SGTM. Maybe we should add a note in the docs about the slim version and when to use it yourself?

[XhmikosR]

Personally, I'd like to know what are the plans for the slim version, i.e. do they plan to keep releasing it or not. Apart from that, we should probably mention that the slim version works fine with Bootstrap v4 at this point.

[dmethvin]

Usually once we add a build we don't take it away. If we did stop making it I would expect that to not happen until the next major version.

I think it's great that you're using the slim build. Most users will end up using a full build but this makes it possible for them to use slim or their own custom build.

[calvinf]

This makes sense as long as the Bootstrap v4 website makes it easy and clear that either jQuery 3.0 or 3.0 slim builds can be used.

[XhmikosR]

Well I'm no good with writing docs. I'd rather merge this and address the
doc changes later with someone else's help for the docs.
On Jul 1, 2016 23:42, "Calvin Freitas" [email protected] wrote:

This makes sense as long as the Bootstrap v4 website makes it easy and
clear that either jQuery 3.0 or 3.0 slim builds can be used.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#20203 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAVVtYLSZ2ckwk4rOwXGkT2Uo25KCJT1ks5qRXvCgaJpZM4JA0Ql
.

[lorvent]

Personally i feel its better to use regular version.

even though you don't need functions like $.ajax those who uses bootstrap with server side languages needs them.

and if we download bootstrap through bower, if you ship slim version, people need to include regular version again.

and difference in size is just 6kb

[hnrch02]

@lorvent This only touches the jQuery files used in the docs/tests.

[lorvent]

oops...sorry about that

[auvipy]

what about jquery 3.1?

[XhmikosR]

Make a separate issue for that please.

On Jul 16, 2016 22:02, "Asif Saifuddin Auvi" [email protected]
wrote:

what about jquery 3.1?

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#20203 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAVVtcauo4R63PHyvIhQlM3D6qhRQFRtks5qWSqrgaJpZM4JA0Ql
.

[bardiharborow]

Just a heads up that this PR changes _config.yaml, which cascades to the example on docs/getting-started/introduction.md. I think changing that without clarifying further might be inadvisable.

[mdo]

Should we try to get this into Alpha 5? Seeing some conflicts preventing this from being merged.

[XhmikosR]

This is obsolete and I need to update it. I'll do it tomorrow probably.

On Oct 10, 2016 22:55, "Mark Otto" [email protected] wrote:

Should we try to get this into Alpha 5? Seeing some conflicts preventing
this from being merged.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#20203 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAVVtekMZnBzuF8h0tX0GV29Sktej3zkks5qypgrgaJpZM4JA0Ql
.

[mdo]

Replaced by #21466.