2 ms·

A WordPress fork without Gutenberg doesn't really work as an alternative for sites built in the last five years or so.

stevenicr 2y ago
I'd like you to expand on reasons for this? I can think of a few for some cases.. However I have around 50 websites or so that are running just fine without Gutenberg.. and if you count the number of updates WP and plugins and themes have rolled out since Gutenberg and multiple that by 50, most of these updates have been an annoying use of time. That being said, Gutenberg stuff today is pretty mature and I do recommend it and use it projects launched post 2024, partially because it's mature at this point, but not insignificantly because it is built into core. I railed long ago that Matt and co should develop Gutenberg, but do it as an optional add-in. I would still build sites today without it if it wasn't baked into core.. altough I will say that as of today, core gutenberg and default theme with FSE is a fine way to build, it's different in many ways, sometimes confusing especially for those who are not used to navigating around FSE differently - but it can be decent to look at on the front end with default tools, and it's lean as far as size and page speed / load time (comparatively speaking). But depending on the use case, and what tooling one may already have at hand, I still feel it could be fine to build without Gutenberg completely.. astra / spectra and stuff from brainstorm force for example would be decent to build with the past few years with not guten needed.. other page builders like siteorigin's were already doing most the things without the delays in development, and removal of standard long standing features like the menus screen and hiding the custom css option..
- robertoandred 2y ago
  As you said Gutenberg (and now FSE) are in core and the default for developing and authoring WordPress sites. For ClassicPress to be an alternative, you would've had to have intentionally veered from what WordPress gave you. Sure, some sites may have chosen to use a site builder or Classic Editor with ACF, but those that didn't are left out in the cold by ClassicPress's decisions.
  - stevenicr 2y ago
    It may not be apparent now, but I believe the main point of classic press was that so many people did not want Gutenberg and they were forcing it in anyway - that classicPress - the whole point of the project is to build with gutenberg and not have the bloat 'from what WordPress gave you' I don't think it's just 'some sites' choosing to use other builders and reject Gutenberg. the plugin repo shows that the 'classic editor' plugin has over 10 million active installations. (classic editor removes gutenberg from the backend screens) - so it's not being left out in the cold, it's keeping things running fine without Gutenbloat. So there was/is a huge need for ClassicPress - it's just that there is an easier way to get a very similar result with WordPress and that is install an extra plugin to remove the 'new plugin' of Gutengerg - and since it's so easy to get back the functionality with a few clicks, may people are leaving many websites without the performance boost of leaner WP and getting the same classic backend.. If autaomattic had not put the classic editor in the repo, many more would of sought out the fork and classicPress would be dealing with more than 10 million sites relying on it. This has been a pretty big issue for some time now, and only very recently would I start to lean into Gutenberg being a mature enough replacement that I start to advocate for it's use. But really there is no need for it - if you wanted a page builder years ago there were plenty, and still are. The great thing about it has been the pulling in other aspects like performance issues and reusable styles and such - so it has helped make WP better in other areas along the way, so now I am okay with it. Being left out in the cold without Guten just means a leaner site that loads faster unless you get into elementor or some other heavy bloatware to have click/drag GUI - but it's not the only option now or back then. Today, it's fine either way.

I'd like you to expand on reasons for this? I can think of a few for some cases.. However I have around 50 websites or so that are running just fine without Gutenberg.. and if you count the number of updates WP and plugins and themes have rolled out since Gutenberg and multiple that by 50, most of these updates have been an annoying use of time. That being said, Gutenberg stuff today is pretty mature and I do recommend it and use it projects launched post 2024, partially because it's mature at this point, but not insignificantly because it is built into core. I railed long ago that Matt and co should develop Gutenberg, but do it as an optional add-in. I would still build sites today without it if it wasn't baked into core.. altough I will say that as of today, core gutenberg and default theme with FSE is a fine way to build, it's different in many ways, sometimes confusing especially for those who are not used to navigating around FSE differently - but it can be decent to look at on the front end with default tools, and it's lean as far as size and page speed / load time (comparatively speaking). But depending on the use case, and what tooling one may already have at hand, I still feel it could be fine to build without Gutenberg completely.. astra / spectra and stuff from brainstorm force for example would be decent to build with the past few years with not guten needed.. other page builders like siteorigin's were already doing most the things without the delays in development, and removal of standard long standing features like the menus screen and hiding the custom css option..

robertoandred 2y ago
As you said Gutenberg (and now FSE) are in core and the default for developing and authoring WordPress sites. For ClassicPress to be an alternative, you would've had to have intentionally veered from what WordPress gave you. Sure, some sites may have chosen to use a site builder or Classic Editor with ACF, but those that didn't are left out in the cold by ClassicPress's decisions.
- stevenicr 2y ago
  It may not be apparent now, but I believe the main point of classic press was that so many people did not want Gutenberg and they were forcing it in anyway - that classicPress - the whole point of the project is to build with gutenberg and not have the bloat 'from what WordPress gave you' I don't think it's just 'some sites' choosing to use other builders and reject Gutenberg. the plugin repo shows that the 'classic editor' plugin has over 10 million active installations. (classic editor removes gutenberg from the backend screens) - so it's not being left out in the cold, it's keeping things running fine without Gutenbloat. So there was/is a huge need for ClassicPress - it's just that there is an easier way to get a very similar result with WordPress and that is install an extra plugin to remove the 'new plugin' of Gutengerg - and since it's so easy to get back the functionality with a few clicks, may people are leaving many websites without the performance boost of leaner WP and getting the same classic backend.. If autaomattic had not put the classic editor in the repo, many more would of sought out the fork and classicPress would be dealing with more than 10 million sites relying on it. This has been a pretty big issue for some time now, and only very recently would I start to lean into Gutenberg being a mature enough replacement that I start to advocate for it's use. But really there is no need for it - if you wanted a page builder years ago there were plenty, and still are. The great thing about it has been the pulling in other aspects like performance issues and reusable styles and such - so it has helped make WP better in other areas along the way, so now I am okay with it. Being left out in the cold without Guten just means a leaner site that loads faster unless you get into elementor or some other heavy bloatware to have click/drag GUI - but it's not the only option now or back then. Today, it's fine either way.