Forum Replies Created

Viewing 13 replies - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Although I was not too enthusiastic, I updated my website from WP 4.9.10 to WP 5.2.4 (from the control panel of the hosting company), and it fixed the issue.

    Still, I have some other sites on which I do not want to use Gutenberg for the time being, and I would be upset if something like that happened to them. I would be good to have a fix, especially since the plugin is supposed to work for earlier WP versions.

    Very useful plugin, by the way: thank you for having developed it and for maintaining it!

    Same problem here! And the tricky issue is moreover that the plugin updates automatically before I am able to access the admin panel of the website on which I am using it, thus preventing me to disable the update – and thus the problem is back…

    FYI, if you stay with WP 4.9 (currently 4.9.10), it continues working (just tested it). And it continues also working with the WP fork, ClassicPress (just tested it as well), which may be a good option for those who do not want to use Gutenberg—don’t forget that the Classic Editor won’t be maintained in the long run anyway, nothing sure after 2021.



    Thank you very much. In case I come across errors, I would let you know.




    I have just resent my email – the fourth one that I have sent to you in one month… I have definitely been patient before posting my critical comments…

    Hoping to hear from you this time and to get the requested refund.

    I am grateful to you for having developed such a plugin!
    As I mentioned when sending my small donation, I hope that you will also support the WP fork ClassicPress, that I have started using on those sites on which I have activated your plugin.
    Best wishes for your work!

    Thank you very much for sharing your experience. Attempting to find some positive elements in Gutenberg despite the terrible experience it provides, I had thought that blocks would bring something useful after all, and photographs came to my mind. Alas, I see that also for such sites, it can create havoc and cause a lot of trouble.

    Thank you for making me aware of that. Sorry to hear about your experience. When I visit the page and look at the counter (already 2,386,978 downloads of Gutenberg right now), I feel very sad thinking about thousands of users going through WP-created hell right now, because they didn’t realize what Gutenberg would mean.

    When I moved my sites to WP, I did it in large part based on arguments of backward compatibility and continuity. How could WP do such a thing now? If they wanted really to move on toward Gutenberg, they should have created a fork for those who want that. What I do really resent is the way Gutenberg has been imposed upon the WP community. I am really afraid we will have to move on. At this point, ClassicPress seems to be the best available option, since it starts so close to WP and will definitely never go the Gutenberg way. But much will depend of the willingness of major theme and plugin developers to support it along with WP.

    With Gutenberg launch coming close, allow me to revive this thread…

    I am not pleased at all with Gutenberg, but if we want to continue using WordPress, we may have to learn living with it. For the time being, I have already activated Classic Editor + Disable Gutenberg (by Jeff Starr) on a majority of my sites.

    In addition to the issue already raised by @abrightclearweb, a major challenge will be inserting a Word document with footnotes, due to the block logic of Gutenberg.

    Anyway, if you find time to play with Gutenberg and can devise some solutions within the coming months, I am sure that many users of your wonderful plugin will be greatly interested to hear more. But I am aware that this might take time (moreover, the plugin will need to be maintained for those who want to continue using the Classic Editor for as long as possible).

    If you manage to develop a Gutenberg version, this may represent a major time investment for you. If such is the case and you need to make a Gutenberg version of the plugin a paid one, I am sure that many users would fully understand that. What you have developed has so often been very useful for many of us. Thank you once again.

    @healthy-lawn-dude You might also use Jeff Starr’s Disable Gutenberg plugin.

    Forum: Reviews
    In reply to: [Gutenberg] Why?

    @buzztone You are right… but how long will the Classic Editor be supported? I can imagine that it will last for five years, maybe more, but sooner or later it will disappear, possibly with unpredictable consequences for older content.

    Like @shane_o, I am a relatively recent newcomer to WP. I had one WP site since 2010, and after a few years I had become so much convinced that I moved most of my sites to WP starting about three years ago. Months of work, but I was very happy to do it because I felt that I had found a solution offering continuity for decades to come – evolving, true, but in continuity.

    My problem is the logic of blocks for the editor. For some websites, it will be great. Not for most of the websites that I am editing, where texts are not dealt with as blocks, but as a whole. I have created a mock site for testing Gutenberg. At each new release, I have tested it again. Not convinced for my needs.

    Please, WP management, do not add Gutenberg to the core! Or run side by side a Gutenberg WP fork and a Classical WP. Or make a commitment that the Classical Editor or any kind of successor with a continuity to the Classical Editor will remain available within Gutenberg WP for the very long term (I mean here not five years, but a much longer time perspective).

    If I had known what would come, I would never have selected WP as the CMS for my sites, but I would have looked for another one. I am still hoping that Gutenberg will develop in a way acceptable to me, but I do not see it at this point: the kind of editor that I need is far away from the Gutenberg. Too bad – and feeling betrayed (I had tested CMS and editors with a block approach, but it had taken little time to understand that it was not what I needed).

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by nuithon. Reason: typo


    Thank you very much for your answer, @pento. Much appreciated.

    No, I had not seen the discussion about adding footnote support to Gutenberg, thank you very much for the link. There are basically two ways to add footnotes: either as a popup when one is clicking on the note call, or the ability to click on the note call and be brought to the note at the end of the post and vice-versa. I experimented with both (in the current, classic WP), testing various plugins, and I came to the conclusion that the second way was the best for my use—and the way I like best for checking footnotes in other articles myself. Obviously, it is not the easiest one to implement in a block-based environment, since it means either creating huge multi-component blocks or implementing functionalities going across blocks. (But I am not a developer, I only describe the issue as I understand it.)

    Two other issues to keep in mind are:

    1) the ability to edit (add, remove…) footnotes once the article has been published;
    2) the ability to import a footnoted article (Mammoth Docx Converter is doing a splendid job in the current WP environment, and I hope that the developer will also think about Gutenberg implementation).

    I have never tested the Academic Blogger’s Toolkit. It seems that it is geared more toward inserting references (based on the usual tools for that) than footnotes, while I write myself articles based more on footnotes than references. But you are right to suggest me to look at what they might be intending to implement.



    I just need to correct the statement I made above about being able to “copy-paste my entire article as content with endnotes into a single block” with Gutenberg. I got confused here with my various testing, this actually didn’t work (wishful thinking in looking for something to love in Gutenberg!). The rest of my remarks remain valid. I would have edited this inaccurate statement if I had a way to do it.

    • This reply was modified 2 years ago by nuithon. Reason: redundant words


    Allow me to join the discussion here. Thank you for your remarks. I understand well where Gutenberg is heading. While I see the advantages it brings for some type of sites, as well as for site-building, Gutenberg is not (yet?) the solution for all of us.

    You emphasize how blocks can be edited individually. True, for some type of content, this is nice and great. For other types of content, however, one wants to be able to edit the content of a post or page as a whole, and not as several individual blocks.

    I see a solution, I am not the first one to mention it: it would be to make individual blocks flexible enough for incorporating (if one wishes to follow this path) all elements contained in a single post until now. Then one could select either to go for several blocks on an individual page or post, or to have a single block on another page or post.

    But this can be done only once Gutenberg includes the ability either to add various elements as separate blocks, or to include all elements into a single block. For instance, as long as Gutenberg doesn’t provide the ability to insert images or other media at different places into a single block, it won’t work for most of my sites (I can only speak for myself, after testing Gutenberg, but it seems I am not the only one).

    I am willing to give up the Classic Editor if something new brings more than what I have now. For the time being, however, for the type of sites I am publishing, Gutenberg would mean going one step back instead of improving my editing experience (I would possibly write otherwise if my sites had been conceived in a different way). Thus it is disturbing to read about users having no option but to prepare for a transition to the Gutenberg experience.

    Maybe something needs also to be clarified here, and you might enlighten us about that, since what I have read until now is not very clear: what will happen in ten years from now to content published with WP as it has been until now? Will it still look the same, and will we keep the ability to edit old content without adjusting it to Gutenberg requirements? Posts that I am publishing today should remain accessible in ten years.

    Over the past 18 months, I spent months of work moving to WP the content of several text-content websites formerly published in HTML or with other CMS. This means a total content of thousands of articles, some of them quite long, going back to 2002 for the oldest ones, carefully redirected one by one from the old URL to the new URL. Huge work, manual work for a large part… Those articles going back to 2002 are now on WP sites: I intend them to remain accessible in 2022, 2032… I am committed to permanent content and permanent links on my sites. Due its famed backward compatibility, I had become confident that WP was the ideal solution. But will it really be so in the post-Gutenberg world? I do not intend to edit those articles one by one in ten years because some people suddenly decide that the transition to Gutenberg should now be completed for all users. OK, I am willing to believe that you are responsible developers and that you do not want to see the hard work of editors vanishing in a few years due to “transition”. But I would like to read clear promises about that.

    I do really see the point of nick3129 post. I do also see your point about the larger scope of the project. But for the editing segment, there should be a choice. If you commit yourselves to keep the Classic Editor (or similar solutions) as a permanent, lasting option, and not as a transitional one, fine: I might then use either editor, depending on my sites and their respective content. Otherwise, either blocks will evolve in such a way that they will be able to incorporate different types of editing experiences, including the ability to deal with complex post contents as a single block (and I hope that this will be the case) — or the time will sadly come for a WP fork, I am afraid…

Viewing 13 replies - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)