search

Automattic / gutenberg-ramp

Control conditions under which Gutenberg loads - either from your theme code or from a UI
https://wordpress.org/plugins/gutenberg-ramp/
76 stars 15 forks source link

Suggested enhancements - to plugin or to documentation #58

Closed dartiss closed 6 years ago

dartiss commented 6 years ago

A user on the wp.org forum has suggested some improvements - either to the plugin itself or to clarify better within the README.

As a non-developer (ie a user with little programming knowledge) I would welcome some more help in the FAQs with how to do the following (or an enhancement to the plugin to enable the following).

Instead of listing every single post ID that I want to apply Gutenberg to, I would like to be able to apply it to:

  • a numerical range of IDs; and/or
  • all IDs greater than or less than a particular number;
  • a particular post category; and/or
  • all posts except an ID (or a range of IDs etc).

One particular option I would like to achieve, as a starting point, is to apply Gutenberg to new posts/pages (ie those with an ID number greater than [X]) but have all existing pages and posts remain in the classic editor, until I have been able to go through and check out what editing, if any, is needed when they are in Gutenberg.

https://wordpress.org/support/topic/excellent-but-would-welcome-some-extra-help-for-non-developers/

I'll keep the wp.org forum updated with any comments made here.

peteschiebel commented 6 years ago

I had this same thought/request, that it could be useful if you could set a starting point for when Gutenberg is the default editor, my first thought was 'all IDs greater than a particular number'. The other suggestions seem interesting as well, particularly the 'all posts except an ID (or range of IDs etc)'.

mattoperry commented 6 years ago

Noting that I've opened https://github.com/Automattic/gutenberg-ramp/issues/60 to attempt to handle this suggestion and other similar ones in a general way.

mattoperry commented 6 years ago

(we can keep this open, but we'll probably focus work on that other issue.)

maevelander commented 6 years ago

Closing this issue in favour of #60