Theoretically this is ok, but as I’ve already said, the point is that Yii needs to show something so, unless you want unstyled html lists instead of menus etc., we need a default style and Bootstrap 2 perfectly fits the purpose. You could always replace it with something else just like you can always replace jQuery (which is currently bundled) but having to show something we need a default style to be shown.
Yaml has been around since 2005, and it is more widely used than Bootstrap/Foundation.
License could have been different, but it’s not all that different from MIT, because both MIT and the CC Attribution license requires that you mention it’s use.
Notice that you can get away with mentioning it in the imprint.
The funny thing about using a CC license for software is that CC themselves discourage the use of their license for code. It is meant for art and other creative works…
I think the Yaml demo looks absolutely great, and it has a lot of features which both Bootstrap and Foundation doesn’t have yet - and maybe never will.
I’ll take a look at that Foundation demo, Haensel.
I am just slightly surprised that you guys seems to be more interested in eye-candy than what lies underneath.
Ideally, I would want something like Yaml, but powered by Sass/Compass - so I am still looking…
Bootstrap is only suitable if you want that specific look, if you want something else, it’s a real pain to override things, their css is extremely complex and is very intrusive. Yii as a framework is designed to give developers an environment to create their own website or application in, not giving a ready made one and let you customize it. Therefore the css-framework should be a foundation where you could build your project on. That makes Boostrap unsuitable to be shipped as the default framework. It’s great as an extension, but it shouldn’t be the default.
I never heard of the Yaml CSS Framework before. It could be older than Bootstrap and Foundation, but I doubt it is more widely used than Bootstrap, I could be wrong though.
The MIT License doesn’t require
Condition: For the free use of the YAML framework, a backlink to the YAML homepage (http://www.yaml.de) in a suitable place (e.g.: footer of the website or in the imprint) is required.
There’s a huge difference between an attribution in the source code and a backlink in the website.
I believe in the perfection and I am a crusader of the best things.
This is what I’ve already said about your arguments.
Read it again
I tried to compare the Bootstrap hits and the Yaml hits on Google, but it’s difficult because there’s more than one project with the “Yaml” name.
The point is that you think to be unerring. I.E. I explained the reason why the MIT attribution and that CC attribution are different and you feel the need to beat the dead horse writing things like “MIT does indeed require attribution - look it up.”. You will never say things like “Ok, I got it.”, you always have to appear smarter than others. Another example? phpnode explained his point of view and your reply was “Don’t be ridiculous.”. Excellent arguments. Grow up, please.
jacmoe - you are flat out wrong, it doesn’t require attribution. It requires that the licence is left intact along with the source code. There is a vast difference. If I use an MIT or BSD library in my app, I don’t need to credit them, I just need to make sure that if I distribute the source code for my app, I have to leave the original licence for the library intact. Huge difference between that and requiring a backlink. I can’t believe you’re even defending this, someone is wrong on the internet and that person is you.
Both Bootstrap 2 and Foundation 2 use Glyphicons Free (licensed under CC BY 3.0 and with the "backlink" request). I would use this "icon font" (MIT licensed) instead of Glyphicons Free (from the Bootstrap 2 download page you can easily deselect the icons "component").