I have a problem. I installed Classic Press on my website and I’m super satisfied. But I can’t install the Kirki Customizer plugin, which is needed in my theme. Some help?
It requires WordPress 5.2
ClassicPress only supports plugins for 4.9 or lower.
This is becoming a major problem. You can read more here
1 Like
Only options are either fork the plugin and keep it on a new path focused on ClassicPress, or elseways just stick to using WordPress.
Or bring certain functions from Wordpress 5+ to classicpress… but nobody seems to understand or care for that idea.
Adding the updated date functions and other non-block functions would go a long way for compatibility…
1 Like
You can always fork ClassicPress and do it so you can share examples and facts 
I think that running behind WordPress makes no sense, but what makes sense anyways? Everything is justified if it makes you happy and you are killing no body. Go for it!
1 Like
On the contrary, CP has ported many functions over from WP 5.0+. But every function cannot and will not be ported over.
1 Like
Nesse caso, como devo proceder? Eu não entendo muito bem o que significa “garfo”. É um processo fácil? Onde posso obter mais detalhes? Nesse caso, este é o plugin.
“Fork” in this case means you copy the plugin and call it something else (which is perfectly legal with open source software), find the issues that prevent the original from working with CP, and fix them. Sometimes this is easy; sometimes not so much .
1 Like
Thank you very much! I’m new to this universe, but I’m in love. I have already migrated all my sites to CP, and I hope they never change the stability and the way the CP works. It’s beautiful!
2 Likes
I was able to solve the problem! I searched for information here on the forum, and did a search in the kirki customize git repository. Following the change logs I found version 3.0.12 that is compatible with ClassicPress. Now my theme is working wonderfully! Thank you very much to everyone who contributed!
2 Likes
Ont his topic of Customizer configuarations; I would hope that most all folks using CP would be most comfortable using less and less of the Customizer. My preference with utilizing the Customizer for theme settings is akin to using Gutenberg for editing. I would rather see the options framework be used—and would build themes with an options framework—rather than use the Customizer for theme options.
Maybe this topic of theme options API could be a new topic but for now just entering my 2 cents on the community directions of CP for backend development for theme makers. Even though theme options were bumped out from WP for not being standardize enough. I would feel that theme options frameworks are more stable due to better documentation and dev standards and now could revive and come back to life w/ CP projects.
2 Likes
I completely agree! However, I use a theme purchased from Codecanyon, which needs Kirki for some customizations. If I could implement it manually, I wouldn’t even install Kirk.
See my comment on Remove the Customizer / move it to a Core plugin - #4 by joyously
This seems backwards to me. Customizer is the theme options framework, that is stable and very helpful. It does need documentation, but that’s easier than theme reviewers trying to understand and review every different way to do options that theme devs write.
1 Like
As you mentioned @joyously having to consider bad coding pratices of many types, just to review a theme options “framework” is not good for reviewers; and, was the main reason WP canned options frameworks. Customizer is more of a ‘mods’ pallette so yes, documentation may be more better to find online than old options settings standards.
If you think about it, plugins are an options ‘framework’ and there seems to be dozens of ways to build a plugin. So theme options could have been OK if there was a standarded produced in the same manner that Customizer standards were produced. Someone at WP World must have thought it was easier/faster to push the customizer instead of building more streamline standardize options settings.
In short: Customizer is too cumbersome and tiny. There is never enough room to write CSS, or reasonable user friendly form entries, etc. without a huge monitor. Nor is it so nominally intuitive compared to how a theme options fworks. Options are more liberal with the page and with user experience. You can add more text and more fields to the options settings pages than you could ever think about putting on the Customizer.
Maybe this is why people struggle to make the customizer do anything productive and require fillers like Kirki.
1 Like
Not really. Customizer is the standard chosen.
It’s not any more cumbersome than other ways to do options. There shouldn’t be much CSS being written, so that’s not something to judge by. Same for other form entries. Themes just don’t need much in the way of data entry.
But they don’t have the non-destructive preview and the draft saving for remote client viewing that Customizer has.
That’s a good reason not to use them then. Themes shouldn’t have a bunch of text and fields. That’s content, and should not be handled by a theme.
I’ll admit I did struggle at first, but I wrote a very nice theme interface in the Customizer without Kirki. Even the Kirki author advised that it would be better if theme authors didn’t use it.
1 Like
Customizer IS too small and who really cares about previews. WP uses the preview as an excuse to make the Customizer “more popular” where as it is never really a preview—at least not for every theme option/mod or plugin. I ALWAYS have a second tab or window open to check my work. Never have I depended on the unreliable Custopmizer screens.
I too, have written several theme mods and was “staisfied” with the Customizer results, but, only satisfied as it was part of the REQUIREMENTS to adding mods for theme building. We all know how developers WANT to use things and then again how they SHOULD use tools for WP. Hoping that CP is willing to let themes be built with Theme Options since the theme Mods is just a stones throw akin to Options and there should be more reliable theme options frameworks similar to plugin frameworks, now days, which, would keep every thing clean and reviewable. (especially had WP gone away from Customizer as the goto…)
Any opinions of Customizer; at least the responses that sound more personal to experence than they do for productivity commenting discourse, are mostly opinions and even though WP used these “opinions” to move forward with Custopmizer; the whole esscence of CP is to move AWAY from these overly protected experiencial tools and assets that WP finds useful which, in reality are just more scripts and fun play-things which never worked in the first place. Sort of like Gutenberg/GutenBroke.
Granted my comments are opinion[ated] yet the ability to have an opinion based on delevoper experience with a crucial core component is based on experience with programming with things-outside-of-wordpress that require UI/UX to be superior in usability; much more so than crampped casual limited components like Customizer.
In brief, theme options should be standardized to incorporate theme mods so theme authors can write more user friendly themes. Customizer is just not a good way to serve up options. At least not useful options.
Kirki was built for a reason. I built something similar for the Customizer but its sole purpose was to make the Customizer wider and more User useful.
1 Like
I liked your arguments. I use the network theme, from code supply. It comes with Canva and Kirki. You, from what I understand, created your own Kirki, is that it? Is it available as a plugin? I would love to test it out.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 2 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.