• If you do not wish to use react or gutenberg then this is perfect.

    I do not wish to use react and it is sad that i cannot remove it from the stack. Framework should include something robust and lightweight. everything else should be optional. gutenberg should be a plugin not core part of WP.

    also not all sites should be “pagebuilders”. if most of the gutenberg’s features are not used then why should you have it? Just for giving a option for modes and admins to break the page?
    Or if you want to build it as “unbreakable” then try to make it clear why you had to put in the extra work just to protect the site from internal people.

    I do currently use roots packages (sage, acorn, bedrock) + lots of laravel like personal solutions. + ACF.
    It has been quite good and fast flow. no need to develop admin panel etc.

    but it seems that WP is turning against those things that made WP good. is it worth to remove so much. I think that soon it is more logical to start building directly on laravel with good CMS on top of it (it seems that there are much more CMS packages out there than couple years back.. time goes fast).

    But this is just my opinion. trying to find ways how to create good sites with superb codebase (both FE and BE). I love this plugin and I hope it will stay working and supported.

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • Thread Starter zimdin12

    (@zimdin12)

    Some info I found (Not my own results, so I will not stand by these claims):

    While both Gutenberg and TinyMCE contribute to page load speed, Gutenberg’s impact is roughly 5% to 10% of the total page size compared to the Classic Editor.

    Considering both the core files and the block library, the total weight increase due to Gutenberg is approximately 400 KB to 600 KB.

    Ofc it depends on miljon things, but it is something.

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this review.