iamfantastikate

Gutenberg as an editor is not a last minute thing, this has been in development with users for over a year.

Gutenberg isn’t a last-minute thing. That doesn’t mean it’s a good thing that should be included in the core. If Gutenberg were in development for five more years, I still wouldn’t think it was appropriate for the core because I’ll never be convinced a page builder is appropriate for all, or even most, users.

Or good for writing flow. Many long-form article writers first write in text editors (true, distraction-free writing, hah). Many of us also write fluidly with basic or even advanced HTML included. Whether we paste our finished work into the classic editor or Gutenberg matters little—unless Gutenberg breaks what we paste into it. Which was my fun little experience. I wasn’t surprised a page builder broke something.

(In an effort to be fair, I just installed the most recent version of Gutenberg on a site, pasted a 3,100-word article into it, and, yep, it still breaks my work, both in the editor and the frontend. Just fabulous.)

The point of the new editor, with feedback from the user base, is to move the ball forward… The editor from version 1.5.1 (when I started with it) has had some improvements but essential was the same editor for a dozen years. That’s stagnation.

The old editor isn’t perfect. It could be improved. I’d love to see improvements. A page builder isn’t an improvement, however. It’s a paradigm shift. Clearly, the core team knows this or it wouldn’t have named the project after the inventor of the freaking printing press.

The new editor is an attempt to answer the question “What can we do to improve the whole editing experience?” Is it perfect? Few things made by anyone is. But it is an attempt by people who are listening and who are taking in that feedback. Good feedback is important.

When I ask why Matt & Co are refusing to listen to the community, I’m referring to the feedback. The feedback, as it stands, is that Gutenberg sucks. It’s gotten a failing grade. Moreover, there’s been no significant change in feedback over time. Out of the 30 most recent reviews, Gutenberg still has a failing grade.

This says—screams, really—that Gutenberg isn’t ready to be rolled out. I would even argue it says the paradigm shift this new editor presents fundamentally misunderstands (1) why people choose the WordPress.org package over WP.com and similar services, (2) how people use the core package, and (3) how people write long-form articles.

I get the impression that a lot of work has been put into Gutenberg, so much so that now, when the user base hates it, it’s been hard for core developers and decision-makers to admit this was a misstep. I get it. But shoving the misstep down everyone’s throats will not make people love it. That’s like marrying someone to “fix” a broken relationship. Marriage ain’t gonna fix it.

I really pity you mods. There are going to be major meltdowns when 5.0 rolls out, and you must know it. Ready your caffeine and ban hammer. Tons of users, who already can barely use the classic editor, will be so confused by the “complex simplicity” of Gutenberg that they’ll be crippled. There are also going to be tons of pissed-off devs.

The core team cannot say they weren’t warned. The foreshadowing is here in big, bold, highlighted print.

A plugin will never be a permanent and lasting change to WordPress.

Which is why the Classic Editor plugin doesn’t address the pushback from the community, and is, instead, a slap in the face. Which is why Gutenberg, which is hugely unpopular for many good reasons, but liked and wanted by a subset of the community, is better suited as a plugin.

[The classic editor plugin is] a migration tool only, the real target for users is the new editor.

So, conform or die over something that isn’t vital to content management, security, or theme development? See, I can’t recall a time in WP’s development history where it worked quite like this over such a major feature change. Maybe when Happy Cog came on board and changed the admin design eons ago, but I feel that’s hardly comparable.

All of this speaks very poorly of future development. If this is going to be the attitude going forward, a lot of big players are going to consider, first, co-developing for a fork or another CMS and then, second, jumping ship. I sincerely hope the core team learns the lesson they’re going to be given when 5.0 rolls out.

You can probably close the thread now, I guess. I’ve said my piece (and thanks for respecting that). I’ll go pop some popcorn now.

Weird issue, but that seems to work! Thanks so much for looking into it!

Solved it. You can’t define a function inside an if statement. Just had to define the function before that. Here’s the working code for any who may cross this and need an answer.