search

bfricka / less-preview

Browser-based LESS to CSS converter built on Express
http://less2css.org
82 stars 41 forks source link

1.6.1 - 1.6.3 released, rumors 1.7.0 coming soon #26

Closed scottgit closed 10 years ago

scottgit commented 10 years ago

Just noting that the site is behind by a few updates. Thanks for your work on this. I know you are attempting to get auto-updating worked out.

bfricka commented 10 years ago

I was... It's not particularly difficult. But I'm not really linked on lesscss.org any longer so I do sort of wonder to what extent this project will continue to even get traffic? I can check Google Analytics.

Either way, I'll make this happen :)

Thanks for the heads up.

scottgit commented 10 years ago

You are still linked and at the top.

bfricka commented 10 years ago

Gotcha. Yeah traffic's been cut in half but it still seems to receive around 1,500 page views a week.

I have a question since I know you've answered many SO questions on LESS... What's your impression in terms of usage of legacy versions of LESS? The main initial motivation for creating this site was to test feature differences between versions since certain projects or apps are stuck on older versions.

However, I'd like to prune some of old stuff if possible.

scottgit commented 10 years ago

I cannot honestly answer what actual "usage" of the legacy versions of LESS are. What I can say, however, is that your legacy versions are precisely why I use and prefer your site above all others for testing. Oftentimes I want to know how a particular coding works in relation to older versions, and it is so easy to just switch through versions an see where something fails, or suddenly starts working. I don't know what type of maintenance it takes for you to keep the older versions, but my thought is, if "not much," then keep it--because that is what makes your site so valuable.

bfricka commented 10 years ago

No maintenance required at all. :) Thanks for the reply

scottgit commented 10 years ago

No problem. I guess I could see where the list may simply get too long to be user friendly in a drop down. Maybe at some point the older versions should be moved to some "sub selection" area and not part of the main drop down selection. Make them available, but not without a little bit of digging to get to them.

bfricka commented 10 years ago

Done. I'm going to start working on this again and get 2+ support soon.