41–50 of 236 posts
Note to the author: if you throw those images into ImageOptim, you can save at least 15%. Probably convenient when you get hit by HN - and don't seem to be hosting images on S3. http://imageoptim.com/
Has any blogging platform implemented anything like that? I know there are Markdown editors with a split view, but I don't know of any that are web-based, nor any that are integrated into existing blogging platforms. And I've definitely never seen any "manage/edit old posts" system as clean and simple as the one in the concept.
Oh, and btw, a brilliant concept that's super easy to miss - being able to type "(image)" in the editor pane and seeing an image upload placeholder in the preview pane. It's a small thing, but one of those things that seems way more obvious than it actually is.
And you hope to captivate the hearts and minds of the open-source developer community? Haven't you seen what happened with earlier versions of GNOME 3 and Unity? We love options. We love settings. We don't want them gone, we just want them neatly organized and tucked away in an inconspicuous corner so that we can tweak them at lunchtime.
You yourself might have never used an obscure feature, such as posting by e-mail, but other people do use it every day, and will never switch unless they can keep using it. In fact, there exists an entire blogging platform (Posterous) that is based on the premise of posting by e-mail. Even my grandfather, who is utterly lost when it comes to regular blogging, can use Posterous because he knows how to send e-mail. Since Posterous is now on life support, I've been considering migrating him to one or another WordPress platform, precisely because WordPress supports posting by e-mail. If your fork removes this feature, it will fall right off my radar. I'm sure that somebody else will be able to tell a similar story regarding any WordPress feature that you think is unnecessary or unrelated to blogging. For example, "No Comments": excellent, now I need to send all my visitors to a third party who specializes in tracking them across the world wide web. Someone who had a blog about online privacy might consider it a case of hypocrisy.
It's easy to drop options and features that you don't see yourself using as part of "blogging". Anyone can do it, and each person who tries will get a product that fits his or her definition of "blogging". Such products, however, won't gain widespread use like WordPress has. A much more difficult but potentially rewarding task is to reorganize options and features so that casual users get sane defaults and power users can tweak to their heart's content. It takes a lot of careful thinking, planning, asking around, and UX experience to get this right, but once you do get it right, the difference can be stunning. As the saying goes, 80% of people only use 20% of features, but each person uses a different 20%.
One solution would be to organize these "extra" features into easily installable plugins, and to have those plugins ready before you sign off on your first official release. That would prevent the kind of negative publicity that surrounded the premature releases of some Linux interfaces. But another section of your write-up gives the impression that you don't want that many plugins, either.
PS: But you should definitely kill the ability to edit themes using the web interface. It's a security nightmare, leaving so many critical files writable by the web server. Also, the split view looks wonderful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not talking about front-end, I mean back-end. WordPress is over 100 files of code 3mb size, loading on every page, BEFORE plugins. It's impossible to build an active, non-cached site with it. I have 100% dynamic php forums running side-by-side with wordpress and they are completely uncached - for WordPress that's impossible at the same load.
I used the sociable plugin (like/tweet/+1 buttons). Out of extremism I tested under elinks, saw some weird empty ul/li hanging around, inspected the plugin config and then went into the code. The latest release at the time was barely beta code, large spans of deadcode, copy/pasted pages-long loops that were 90% similar. Wordpress plugin pages quote millions of download for this plugin. Who needs quality ?
This is what I love about PHP devs. Imagine how much effort it was to write that. The author may not have have the chops to refactor that into something elegant, but he wanted it done and was perfectly willing to just do it the hard way and FUCKING SHIP IT, warts and all. Its easy to laugh at code after the fact, but you can't argue that a ton of people aren't finding the author's work valuable.
Symfony, as a core framework for CMS's gives an amazing bedrock to build exactly what you're talking about.
... Just as an example of something else that exists that is working forward towards exactly what you're wanting to build, you should check out Apostrophe, http://apostrophenow.org/
And then theres the 90 other projects that exist on 90 other languages... But yeah, don't fork Wordpress, make something better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this is could be a much better project if it was written fresh, and preferably in a different language altogether.
PHP has the big benefit of being deployable anywhere. Without that fact it is unlikely that projects like Drupal or WordPress would've taken off as they have.
Unless I misunderstood what you mean, here :)
I'd like to see a fork Ghost as a Rails app. Anyone game?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At this stage I think a fork is needed, the work needed to change the core, the people behind WordPress just won't get behind.
Unrealistic for software that powers over 20% of all new websites. Also, a bit presumptuous of the core team. I think there is a lot of support for a simplified UI (see Matt's post above). Just because there is a barrier before you get patches submitted doesn't make the core team unwilling. Each decision needs fleshing out before getting put into a new version of WP. If it wasn't that way, the project would be a (tot…