I’m getting more and more emails and messages about this so want to make my position clear…
Will Source / Shaking the Habitual stacks work in RW9?
No.
Why not?
My stacks were designed and built to work inside of the Stacks plugin. Without Stacks there would be no Shaking the Habitual. If Stacks can’t be a part of RW9 then neither can my stacks. Letting my stacks bypass Stacks and function as elements would not sit right with me.
My intention is to act in as scrupulous a way as possible and to stand united with Isaiah and the other stack developers.
What should I do as a Source / Shaking the Habitual stacks user?
If you develop exclusively in the Stacks ecosystem then I would suggest that you stick with RW8. Stacks and all of your stacks (from all developers) will continue to work perfectly (and be fully supported and updated) for a long time to come.
Once Stacks app is realised by Isaiah then it would be well worth considering making a jump over to that. With a dedicated Stacks app we’ll be able to take our stack (and your web) development to the next level! (And, of course, you’ll be able to bring all of your stacks over with you!)
What about RapidWeaver 9?
Elements sounds like it will be a significant update. If you want to try out a new way of building your websites then be sure to give it a spin.
I hope you understand and support the stance that I (and many other developers) are taking in relation to this.
With you all 100%.
I’ll be interested to see what RW9 is about, but to me, I’m treating it as if it’s some brand new kid on the block, and whether it is worth me moving to them from RW8 and Stacks - or the new Stacks App.
It doe snot sit right with me either the way this is playing out.
RW is nothing without the Stacks environment.
Thanks for making your position crystal clear and for stating what every Stacks developer must be thinking.
The future for stacks users is very clear without any break in the roadmap. Keep using RW8 with Stacks to work on Stacks projects, and then switch over to Stacks App when it is ready, if you want.
The best thing of all is that we will be in the very capable hands of Isaiah to carry us forward.
I imagine this is the exact issue for RealMac. RW has become an engine for Stacks whilst the core RW product dates year after year. Many people don’t want to buy RW and then be told they should buy Stacks plugin and 3rd party stacks and frameworks on top. They want a sub-£100 product that is fit for purpose in 2022 in its own right.
I’m hopeful that a dedicated Stacks 5 App will be a big leap forward for those of us who want to use stacks, and that separately, RW will evolve to do what it needs to do. For me personally, I’m thinking Stacks 5 and frameworks for my more demanding clients and RW as a Blocs alternative for simple, elegant sites.
Stuart, ditto for me as a user! I am not a developer but I have to say as a consumer, I wondered why I paid money for RW, until I installed Stacks. I will be very interested to see what the Stacks app delivers.
Nothing particularly sinister going on there. Dan converted an earlier (unencrypted) version of Source stacks to show me that they could work as Elements. Elements has now been set up so that encrypted stacks cannot be converted into Elements. The absence of this type of barrier was one of the major issues with the initial plans for Elements where - without the Stacks plugin or developer agreement - users would have been able to simply use any stack in Elements. That is now not the case and it will be up to each developer whether they want to support Elements or not.
That’s my reason for sticking with Stacks. Had RW developed their own Elements system rather than converting Stacks, I’d not have a problem. But to take an existing product and convert it to run on your new system leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
This also means I’m unlikely to purchase Stacks from developers who will convert their Stacks to Elements as they’re encouraging something I disagree with.
Developers that convert their stacks to elements make sure that their customers will be able to use whatever platform they choose to create websites with. Be it Stacks App or RW Elements. Punishing developers because they offer this option to their paying customers… that’s just childish and hits the wrong person. But it seems to show the attitude of quite some people after this whole RW/Stacks conflict emerged.
You need to remember that Stacks and Elements are not owned by the same company. Each is its own development environment. Stacks has built a mature product in over a decade. Elements has not even been released yet. It’s hardly fair for Elements to simply take what Stacks has developed. Elements should build its own system and its own elements that should be purchased separately from the Elements store.
My response is far from childish, I simply cannot support sherlocking nor migrating users from Stacks to Elements at the expense of Stacks.
Yeah I’m with you @svsmailus, I cannot be condoning any kind of “sherlocking”. And I hope the devs supporting Elements go out of business, that would be a great thing for the Stacks community. While I’m at it I’m boycotting Amazon because they killed off the book stores, I’m not buying any more Apple gear because of all the things they copied and I’m never going to Google anything because Android copied iOS.
Bottom line, to drive the entire ecosystem, it is essential for both Stacks and Elements to not only survive, but also thrive. It’s the only solution that will ensure the success and growth of the ecosystem as a whole which can only be a good thing for us users.
Stop the innuendoes, insinuated name calling, and passive aggressive behavior, let’s move on. StacksPro development is alive. RW Elements development is alive. The free market will work it out. Stop making this negative.
Firstly, this is not positive. Had you read Isaiah’s post of needing to work 15 hours a day as RM have pulled the rug from under him, you may appreciate someone having their livelihood removed.
Secondly, only a minority know of the split. Many assume Elements is the successor to Stacks. One post on the RWE forum likened the change to mac moving from intel to M1.
There is nothing in this that makes RM come out with integrity here. Whilst I appreciate they needed to innovate, but to offer a converter from Stacks to Elements whilst Stacks is still a competing product is utterly appalling IMO and to showcase Elements in their beta that they have converted from developers who have expressly stated they are not supporting elements is totally misleading people.
I assume you refer to “their paying customers”, as those customers who bought stacks to run on Stacks, having already bought Stacks. So that these developers can offer a service to convert those stacks to run, so that “their paying customers” don’t have to pay for Stacks or futre Stacks upgrades. The advantage to these developers would be a big saving in the total cost of the solution and sell more product. New RW Elements users would gain access to the converted stacks without every buying Stacks.
I do hope such developers will add in a "license for using stacks and the last decade of Stacks development " type restoration fund for these converted stacks, payable to partially restore Isaiah’s loss of income. Those developers offering a choice for “their paying customers” should add this further choice into the equation.
Alternatively, developers considering converting their stacks to Elements, could check for a valid license key (i.e. a Stacks purchase) from any Elements purchasers?
