The WYSIWYG Advanced plugin is a renamed TinyMCE Advanced 4.8.x, so, it’s already pretty battle-tested. It would be cool if it was integrated into core in that I would have one less thing to think about, but, as @azurecurve mentioned, the default editor is already a suitable default. At this point, I’m still calling the plugin a beta because if you download it from GitHub it appends -master to the directory name. This is going to be corrected by creating a release version soon.
6 Likes
Started a new petition for this here:
1 Like
In general, what’s the thinking behind bundling something with core?
Is it that we are assuming it’s likely to be required by the majority of users and will save a minute or two in installation time? How much of a majority? How do we even know what the number is? Because the people who don’t want it will just have to uninstall it, which is more steps for them.
I’ve always found having to uninstall Akismet and Hello Dolly with every WP install to be slightly annoying.
1 Like
Well my thinking firstly is bundling would only be for so something universally used and in line with the project goals (eg. Editor) that it would truly make sense. Obviously to avoid package bloat the criteria would have to be super-strict like this (who knows perhaps there won’t be anything else that would ever meet it.)
Which is why Hello Dolly/Akismet are great examples of what not to bundle, I mean, they wouldn’t even make it to a list of must-have kind of plugin… but even for must-have plugins there are many existing options. (Sure there are other editors out there too, but they diverge from the basic editor compatibility significantly.)
I can see definite advantages for bundling this:
- to bring awareness to the availability of Advanced Editor options while still allowing them to be truly optional. This kind of exposure helps a “feature” plugin like this evolve due to more attention and contribution
- to have a place in the project (plugin) where the Editor could be further improved without it having to affect the stability of the basic editor
- along similar lines, adds the possibility of merging other editor features (such as a frontend editor, improved autodrafts) in the future
- to demonstrate this is a better workable approach for an improved editor experience (contrasting to Gutenberg inclusion in WP core)
2 Likes
All good points majick. Thanks for the detailed reply.
I especially like the last one… to show how it should be done. 
I guess I’m fundamentally against including anything with the core as I’d like it to be as light and clean as possible. But an advanced editor would possibly be one case where I’d make an exception. As you say, it may turn out to be the only one that is warranted.
2 Likes
bundling would only be for so something universally used and in line with the project goals (eg. Editor) that it would truly make sense. Obviously to avoid package bloat the criteria would have to be super-strict…
Virtually every site has a contact form, an about us page, and an FAQ page, but, like an advanced editor, they don’t belong in core. The criteria is already strict – streamline the thing, don’t add bloat – which is why an exception would have to be made to get an advanced version of existing functionality added. Additionally, I think giving every average joe user an advanced HTML editor is not a good idea – this advanced functionality should be installed on a case-by-case basis.
2 Likes
@anon71687268 If it were bundled with core, would that mean the plugin would be managed differently? I’d think it would just get it more attention and improvements, and there could be more devs brought on board so you wouldn’t have to do all the support and improvements yourself.
1 Like
I’m just not in favor of bundling advanced functionality where there is already completely suitable functionality in place. It would also set a bad precedent. For example, ClassicPress takes basic security measures…why not bundle an actual security plugin? Another example, end users can create an FAQ page with basic markup…why not include an FAQ plugin? My point is simply that plugins shouldn’t be bundled, no matter how useful they might seem.
3 Likes
Improvements are only of use if you are actually using the plugin in the first place. It’s something I might install on one or two sites, but mostly I just don’t need it, and if it came bundled in with core the first thing I’d do is delete it.
1 Like
I definitely don’t want to be known as the developer behind a Hello Dolly… 
4 Likes
What? Don’t you want to be associated with any plugin like the one that “symbolizes the hope and enthusiasm of an entire generation summed up in two words sung most famously by Louis Armstrong.”
Can’t think why not. 
3 Likes
Considering Matt wrote that, the red flags should have been waving long before Gutenberg haha. What a fakeness.
3 Likes
I never had any idea what that was all about. Just seemed annoying and completely irrelevant to me.
But maybe it’s a good example of “adding things bundled to core that seemed like a good idea at the time”.
2 Likes
I think Hello Dolly was meant as an example of how to start on making your own plugin, but I dont see why thats needed in bundle, not everyone is going to do that.
Kinda like how in widgets (filled in sidebar), pages (About) and posts (hello world) there are examples too that nobody asked for.
1 Like
If people want an advanced editor they can search the directory and install one.
Bundling plugins just means for things that have to be uninstalled when a new site is created.
And as @anon71687268 said, where do you stop with bundling plugins?
4 Likes
To me the topic of bundling plugins should not be an issue. One of the things I dislike about WordPress at the moment is having to install plugins to remove some of the included features.
If ClassicPress’s main target users are businesses, and therefore developers, then the core should be kept clear of any parts that can be provided by a plugin, especially if there is more than one plugin to do the required function, or a few lines of code in a functions file.
To cater to the not so adept user the welcome page could include a suggested list of plugin types. Please note types not actual plugin “recommendations”.
As in - for a basic brochure site you will need a Security plugin, Forms plugin, Enhanced editor …
For a membership site …
These could link to the “Confirmed working with ClassicPress” list
This keeps ClassicPress clear of having to be involved in updating plugins endorsing them or even recommending individual plugins.
The great people working on this project can then concentrate on producing the best “CMS” not a “website builder”
8 Likes
One of the main advantages of the “core plugins” idea for v2 is that we don’t have to do a full core release to update them. Historically, things like XML-RPC and REST have had security issues (and will almost certainly have more), and WP will have to do a full release.
So, no bundled plugins of any kind.
How we display core/recommended/whatever plugins has yet to be decided; I’ll take another stab at the plugin directory spec later this week.
6 Likes
I wasn’t aware of the “core plugins for v2” idea, sounds definitely like a better approach, where can I read up on the details of that…?
I can see it would seem to make more sense to have a “Core” or “Feature” plugin tab in place of the existing (and rather irrelevent) “Featured” tab in the plugins installer might be a better place for these (and that could easily be done before a plugin directory is ready.)
The criteria for those could still be tight, but wouldn’t have to be as strict as it would be for bundling. Similarly a “Recommended” plugins tab could replace the “Popular” tab (but that may have already been discussed elsewhere?) In any case, a spec for what could be included where would seem just as important as how they are displayed?
3 Likes
Here is our roadmap:
We have also had a bunch of great conversations related to plugins in the #plugins:plugin-directory category.
Here are a couple of good links to get started:
2 Likes
Thanks for starting a petition for this, the “upvote count” on the petitions is the best way we currently have to measure the demand for all the new features that people would like to see.
2 Likes