[axelut]

From a design perspective this looks really good, I like the components, the typography, the generated pages from Figma etc. Also the documentation seems to be clean and user-friendly. It's way better than most of the docs.

From the development perspective and from other comments that are here, and also from many articles like: https://dev.to/jaredcwhite/why-tailwind-isn-t-for-me-5c90 or https://dev.to/neophen/tailwind-is-bad-because-i-don-t-like-... or https://betterprogramming.pub/tailwind-css-is-probably-overh... you can see that there are still a lot of people who hate the way Tailwind work with classes. But in the same time you can see that they have a steady grow month over month since April 2019: https://www.similarweb.com/website/tailwindcss.com/ that means some people love the way Tailwind is working with utility classes.

So I think this is a really good extension that can speed up the development process of people who like Tailwind. For those who don't like Tailwind, there are many other alternatives. There is no such thing that can fit for everybody.

Some questions 1. What did you use to create the docs? 2. What are your next steps with this project?

[mamcx]

TailwindCSS is the biggest jump in productivity for me in years.

I think where it shine most is when you are making your own UI and need to deploy different components/customizations, ie: If you are doing a single page site is not that obvious "why is like this?", but generating UIs on the fly for a admin backend and suddenly THIS IS THE WAY!.

TailwindCSS is like static types for UI. Note:

    <button class="button"> == fn sum(a,b)

    <button class="font-bold block px-4 py-2 m-1 rounded shadow outline-none text-center bg-primary-700 text-white"> == fn sum(a:U16,b:i32):Result<i64, Error>

The "verbosed" nature of both cause some hate, but you will appreciate it the more big/complex the project is.

What you get with tailwind is exact understand of each component and how it will look based on their "types"/classes.

What you get with others like bootstrap is too abstract/implicit looks that you can't figure at a glance. So, tailwinCSS like static typed programming is optimized for "a glance"/local understanding.

What is also very counterintuitive is that my tailwind pages are LESS heavy than boostrap! (true for html and CSS)

[themesberg]

Thanks for the feedback!

1. We used HUGO as a static site generator and Webpack to put things together using markdown files. (it's open-source: https://github.com/themesberg/flowbite including the HUGO source files)

2. We're now working on the application UI code (pro version) but we will also add new components and external styled plugins (datepicker, charts) to the open-source library.

We have a roadmap on the landing page: https://flowbite.com/#roadmap

[scns]

Are the blue bullet points and the balck ones TODOs?