Yep⊠and now you point it out, I canât stop noticing it every time I do it.

Really Bubble? In what world is this great UX?
Yep⊠and now you point it out, I canât stop noticing it every time I do it.

Really Bubble? In what world is this great UX?
Iâm not sure how big of an issue that is. Hereâs a 0px tall group with no contents:

And if you somehow lost it in the design canvas, you can always see it in the tree view:

Why do you need to see groups anyway, if not to drop something into it? Once youâve put content into a group, you want to see the content, not the group itself. And of course it will usually fit to height, so he min height is irrelevant.
I think the best workflow is:
No need for the height to be 10px anywhere in this workflow ![]()
Definitely, but thatâs not helped at all by the default height being 10px. And itâs not even always a problem, e.g. if you are in a situation where gap spacing doesnât apply because itâs the only sibling. My point: 10px doesnât help at all, and it sometimes hurts.
I just donât see any reason to have the default set to 10px. It encourages/teaches thinking about Groups in the wrong way, I think. Philosophically, we should think of a group as a container that fits content and the content determines the height of the container (100% agree âfit height to contentâ needs to be checked by default).
Q: Whatâs the height of a group?
A: The height of the content!
^^ That should be the baseline assumption. If thereâs ever any answer different, then it shows that something is going on for a specific reason. If Iâm a developer and I see a min height value, Iâm immediately thinking
Why this value? What does this do? If I change it will I break something? Does this need to be this exact min height?
In tradcode we had this term âmagic numbersâ for when you have a number value hardcoded in but no explanation as to where that number came from. So if a padding needs to be 2x the gap plus 4px, and the gap is 8px, itâs better to write padding-top: (gap * 2) + 4px than to write padding-top: 20px because a developer seeing the âmagic numberâ of 20 has no idea why itâs 20. I think a similar principle applies here. There shouldnât be completely arbitrary values (especially by default!) in elements which arenât there for a purpose. This is why when you create a DIV in HTML it is height 0px. It would make no sense to give a container a min height.
Why do you need to see groups anyway
To know it was added. I understand your point that an experienced developer can have methods that make it unnecessary to see it was added. But, Bubbles biggest challenge is new user retention or rather new users becoming subscribers. The challenge is due to the learning curve which bubble has focused on trying to flatten for several years now.
I also would like to chime in.
First of all, thank you @heythere for starting this discussion again. I hope with your help we can not only get this sorted, but maybe, just maybe, change the symptomatic problem of Bubble not listening to their users.
I was actually the one who started this min pixel and min width discussion about 4-6 weeks ago, and got Bubble down from 60x60 to 40x40, all the while saying this change doesnât help at all, and we need 10x10 and NO fit width (but for sure YES to fit height).
So I hope weâre going to get this right this time.
The reason for 10px height and NO fit width (but YES to fit height) is very straightforward, thereâs no questions about it:
Talking about the symptomatic problem of Bubble not listening⊠I heard there were a lot of discussions in the team about this. That is cool, and donât get me wrong, I see Bubble improving in hearing the users.
But letâs talk about this specific annoyance. Again, 4-6 weeks ago, I reached out through X, Bubble folks responded, the message was sent to the Bubble team. And I am grateful for this. Them being responsive at the beginning on the flow is what improved the most I believe.
But then, the decision was made inside Bubble, where neither I, nor anybody else (for all I know) from the community got any say.
The decision of changing those numbers from 60px to 40px, and not changing fit width to OFF was just sent back to me, as a given. I said this doesnât help at all, but the decision was made, the change was made and got life the next day if I remember correctly.
No âwhat do you think, would this fix the issue? Should we ask somebody else out of community too, if they agree?â or anything.
That is whatâs lacking in the process. I see Fede, I see Sam, I see Andrew, I see @bubble, I sometimes get to go to feedback sessions.
But I believe there needs to be constant communications with the community, with egos set aside. Whatever the channel the feedback came in (I know thereâs Slack community).
We donât bite, at least I donât
And I am always ready to jump on a call to talk through stuff.
Again, thank you @heythere for organising the discussion, and I hope my feedback helps a bit.
You know whatâs an even more incomprehensible offender? Pages are still not responsive by default!
Ideally would allow these to be set in the styles menu so we can all choose what works best for our needs. If not possible, I agree with your suggested dimensions.
OMG, even I as a novoice Bubble developer have had problem with this literally from the very first time I started building with Bubble I changes them and never have I ever kept the as default. Thankyou for mentioning it
![]()
For me, the issue is not so much the height of a Group when you create itâŠ
I think 10px or even 40px is fine then - (although fit height to content should DEFINITELY be the default).
The issue is when you Group existing elements into a group (especially a row).
In this case, it should be obvious that the desired behaviour should always be Fit Height to Content with 0 minimum height. Making the min height 40px here (or anything other than 0) makes no sense at all.
The menu item says âGroup elements into a rowâ.
It doesnât say âGroup elements into a row and add a load of extra space at the bottom for no good reasonâ.
And all groups should always be created with no max width and fit width to content unchecked.
But really, as someone else pointed out already (and due to the clear disparity in opinions on this), a simple global setting in the editor to define the default settings for groups is all thatâs need to resolve this.
Yeah, absolutely correct. Actually, you want to know if you need to change the min height to 0 later on, so it should stay a big number. But not when youâre stacking groups (which breaks quite often, but thatâs a separate story).
I wonder if bubble devs actually use their own product, surely they would know by now how painful this is for users.
They donât. Theyâve 100% not built an AI app on Bubble. They recently discussed âstreamingâ at Bubblecon but nothing about websockets support.
I wonder if bubble devs actually use their own product, surely they would know by now how painful this is for users.
Actually, I believed this, then I spoke to them in person and realised that for the most part they do already know whatâs wrong, but just donât have the resources to implement it.
Of course, that doesnât make the issue go away so I personally still want more stuff like BubbleBoosts, but multiple PMs I spoke to knew about this very thread!
Iâve been saying it since the new responsive engine came out. Default widths and heights should be modifiable from the settings panel. I understand that bubble needs to be accessible. However, it should still be customizable too. These two ideas are not mutually exclusive
Actually, I believed this, then I spoke to them in person and realised that for the most part they do already know whatâs wrong, but just donât have the resources to implement it.
Of course, that doesnât make the issue go away so I personally still want more stuff like BubbleBoosts, but multiple PMs I spoke to knew about this very thread!
This is weird to me. They raised $100M not too long ago. Thatâs a lot of salaries. Where did it all go?
Where did it all go?
Theyâre not burning cash heavily and are making an engineering hiring push now
Theyâre not burning cash heavily and are making an engineering hiring push now
Yeah, thatâs the point of VC money, blitzscaling. Iâd like to give them the benefit of the doubt and think that maybe it just took a while for them to get over the bootstrapping mindset and adjust.