Weekly update – 14 August 2026

[Ivan Gretsky]

11 hours ago, ryan said:

What do folks think about the Statamic pricing model? Free core. Paid Pro version with extra features, support, Pro modules included. And an enterprise option for large scale.  

I personally dislike this a lot. And I do not think that this would bring in more audience either. In my vision PW is an advanced alternative to free and open source things like WP, Drupal, Joomla! and past days Modx. For a wide international crowd that would probably be an argument against PW. It could be beneficial for sales in US and EU to some extent. But with this decision PW needs to be more geared towards some specific needs of the target audience, find its niche and listen to the feedback more. Which is not its inherent strong point as we can see from the discussion above.

 

8 hours ago, diogo said:

Concerning the governance of processwire, and the comparison to other, bigger, projects. Laravel seems to be governed in a very similar way to processwire, or am I looking at it wrongly? Can you guys clarify that? Other projects are for profit, and hire a team of developers, I think Kirby falls into this category. Big open source projects, like Drupal, function by voting, but have a complex system of authority splitting, and a board of directors, conflict resolution group, etc. We are free to question Ryan's method, and here he is, asking openly for everyone's opinion, but I don't think it's fair to question his intentions.

I do not think that there is a problem with the governance being authoritarian rather than meritocratic. For me the problem that does not allow PW to grow is sometimes the absence of governance at all) Some more clear leadership, publicity, explanation would already solve many problems. Each time @ryan himself answers here in the forum like he did above to @bernhard's post inspires me a lot and gives perspective. But that's rare. I know for sure many of the forum members know not what to expect or how to emphasize an idea or make a proposal or help when the eagerly want to. And if there were some kind of a team to PW having some shared view that could be solved easily. 

 

8 hours ago, diogo said:

Because I use processwire as a tool for client work (and I know that was always Ryan's intention for himself also), I don't feel the need to make a profit of processwire itself. I understand that some people invested work on exactly that thought. What made you guys invest those hours on the modules, was it a genuine thought that the processwire ecosystem was already ready to yeld that return, or was it a bet that processwire would sooner or later be ready for it? Either way, I don't think it's fair either to put the responsibility of not being able to make that profit on Ryan's shoulders, if that's what I'm hearing in some of the comments from this and other threads.

That's my feeling too. I like that PW can be used almost without any modules and it is it's strong point. I do not want it to become needing everyday security updates or not working without some expensive subscription or modules. In fact I would prefer less Pro modules (with AI we might soon end up with all of them having open source alternatives if not obsolete - see what @maximus is rolling out like every few days))) and more community support. Like a fund or foundation. Combining the 2 together I would pay a yearly subscription to be a part of the PW development council (just to sit and listen with a rare chance to say something)) Nowadays community, ideas, enthusiasm are once again in value and maybe now more than the skills or technology itself.

[szabesz]

5 hours ago, Ivan Gretsky said:

with AI we might soon end up with all of them having open source alternatives if not obsolete - see what @maximus is rolling out like every few days

Even with AI-aided development processes, one only has 24 hours in a day, so sooner or later even @maximus will not be able to support that sheer number of modules of his.

By paying for someone else's module one can (hopefully) save time, therefore in the end rendering the end result for the client cheaper. At least that is when it IS worth paying for a module, and AI will (hopefully) never read our mind, so we will always need to spend time to produce good quality results even when relying on AI-driven solutions.

Plaid modules are welcome, when they bring good value for money. The just need to come with perpetual fallback licenses and surely NOT with a subscription lock.

[maximus]

Thanks guys, it’s really nice to see my name mentioned here. 🙂 My longer-term goal is not simply to release many separate modules, but to close the full product-development loop: to assemble a ProcessWire backend from small, focused components and use it to power both a website and a native iPhone app. Mercato will most likely become my first real experiment in this direction, which is why I recently rebuilt it around a versioned headless API for iOS clients.

Of course, the same general architecture can be created with other systems. What I particularly like about ProcessWire, however, is how naturally it works as a lightweight construction kit: each module can remain a small independent application with a clear responsibility, while several modules can be connected into a much larger product without forcing every project to carry the entire platform.

Perhaps the closest analogy is Arduino: the individual board and components do not determine what you must build. You connect only the pieces you need, reuse them in different combinations, and gradually turn a small experiment into a complete system. That is increasingly how I see ProcessWire - not only as a website CMS, but as a modular backend for web and mobile products.

@Ivan Gretsky @szabesz

[zilli]

Hi @maximus,

I’d also love to use ProcessWire to build mobile apps, especially with NativePHP, although unfortunately it currently only works with Laravel.

I’m actually doing this right now. I’m building a PWA with ProcessWire, and I’m planning to use PWABuilder to package it for the Google Play Store and Apple App Store. Handling Google should be straightforward; Apple will be more of a gamble.

Having native SQLite support would be a huge win. But I hope we can eventually move toward a system that gives us all of this, if possible, without losing what makes ProcessWire special in the first place.

[HMCB]

On 8/24/2026 at 7:19 PM, cb2004 said:

Another long post for me to take in and compute with my ADHD brain, but it resonated a lot.

The bit I keep coming back to is this. Why are people trying to build a sustainable income from modules when ProcessWire already enables developers to have a sustainable income? That's the whole thing, isn't it. The platform is the business model.

I'm a selfish developer who doesn't give back to the ProcessWire community a great deal anymore. But how many people just use ProcessWire and don't give back? More than we'll ever know. We don't see them in the forums, and I don't think the community is small. I just think ProcessWire users crack on. That's always been my view. This isn't a forum full of drag and drop theme monkeys, it's people quietly shipping client work.

Do I use all the Pro modules? No. Do I buy them all and renew them? Yes. I'm self employed but work with an agency, so I don't purchase an agency licence. Not sure whether that's right or wrong, but if a site goes elsewhere I don't give them access to any updates. Would I be happy to pay for a ProcessWire licence? Absolutely. We'd just add it to the client's bill. People pay for far worse modules that blow up their site on other platforms.

Lots of discussions to be had here, arguably over a beer or two at a meetup, virtual or not.

Your comments are really thought provoking. Thank you.

[HMCB]

13 hours ago, maximus said:

Thanks guys, it’s really nice to see my name mentioned here. 🙂 My longer-term goal is not simply to release many separate modules, but to close the full product-development loop: to assemble a ProcessWire backend from small, focused components and use it to power both a website and a native iPhone app. Mercato will most likely become my first real experiment in this direction, which is why I recently rebuilt it around a versioned headless API for iOS clients.

Of course, the same general architecture can be created with other systems. What I particularly like about ProcessWire, however, is how naturally it works as a lightweight construction kit: each module can remain a small independent application with a clear responsibility, while several modules can be connected into a much larger product without forcing every project to carry the entire platform.

Perhaps the closest analogy is Arduino: the individual board and components do not determine what you must build. You connect only the pieces you need, reuse them in different combinations, and gradually turn a small experiment into a complete system. That is increasingly how I see ProcessWire - not only as a website CMS, but as a modular backend for web and mobile products.

@Ivan Gretsky @szabesz

I love this take. Really. And its spirit touches on my earlier comment: positioning is as important as development decisions around PW because it communicates intent, which gives someone a reason to consider PW.

My two cents as a non-developer: PW’s ecosystem feels unwieldily because there are many options and they’re not that easy to discover. Maximus’ recent contributions were the first time I felt like there’s plug-and-play with regards functionality and that they’re comprehensive enough to build something with as a non-developer. And by that I am not discounting the community contributions through the years, but I feel like perception is everything. If you’re trying to attract hardcore developers, I don’t know how PW will fare; there are already so many options out there. To me, the opportunity exists with people like myself: we are not hardcore devs but have enough balls to think we can build great things out of LEGO blocks.

Sorry if I jumped around a lot. Typing on my phone and I’m touching briefly on all my thoughts. I could expand at a later point.

[bernhard]

On 8/24/2026 at 3:12 PM, ryan said:

I get that you don't like that it didn't use your AdminStyle framework. I would have liked it to use that as well, or even to be a separate module. But the reality is it doesn't matter to most ProcessWire users what module or CSS it extends or whether it uses LESS, SCSS or plain CSS.

On 8/24/2026 at 11:53 PM, diogo said:

Again, and as we explained before, this was never supposed to be the "definitive theme", but simply a "skin" for the uikit theme (and this means, uikit, jqueryui, some custom jquery modules, three different types of overlays, etc...). The theme is only CSS on top of the original one, and still manages to introduce a new kind of theming that doesn't require compilation, to conciliate stuff that was incoherent, introduce a dark mode and sticky header.

Just for the record... This is what you did:

This is what you stated I was suggesting:

And this is what I suggested:

You might be right that most users don't care.

But it might still have been helpful to listen to those who did care. To ask why they cared so much and what exactly bothered them about the decision. Maybe even to involve people upfront if you know they have relevant experience or will be directly affected by the change. At the very least, I think that would have been respectful.

And if people don't care whether it uses LESS/SASS/CSS I think it would have been better to stick to LESS (like UIkit, Reno and AdminThemeRock) rather than adding yet another layer of complexity/technology (as Diogo mentioned we already have a lot with jQuery etc) and announcing a fancy new admin theme that doesn't need a compile step. Why do that if nobody cares?

I think those are fair points. Instead, you seem to reduce the disagreement to a much simpler explanation: "he just wanted it to use AdminStyleRock."

And that brings me back to this thread, because I feel you're doing something similar again. My experience with commercial modules becomes "I gave up", and my criticism becomes "making someone down" or "putting the responsibility for that on Ryan's shoulders."

That could not be further from what I was trying to say.

There were reasons behind both my position on Konkat and what I wrote about the commercial ecosystem. You don't have to agree with those reasons. But reducing them to the easiest explanation makes it very difficult to have a meaningful discussion about them.

Maybe "I wouldn't recommend ProcessWire" actually means that ProcessWire isn't meant for the audience I had in mind. Maybe considering it technical debt in my current project is perfectly fine because ProcessWire isn't meant for that kind of project. Both could be completely valid conclusions, and both could actually be helpful in figuring out the right positioning for ProcessWire and what kind of growth makes sense.

But to find that out, you'd have to ask why I came to those conclusions rather than assume what was behind them.

Anyway, I wish you and ProcessWire all the best going forward. I don't think I have anything more to contribute.

[maximus]

🙄😕

[maximus]

I looked again at Bernhard’s diagrams, and I think they make one important distinction very clear. This was never a request to build Konkat on top of AdminThemeRock. It was a request to let Reno, AdminThemeRock and Konkat remain separate expressions built from the same UIkit foundation.

Sometimes ProcessWire reminds me of Toyota: dependable, familiar and repairable. Sometimes it reminds me of BMW: ambitious and innovative, but with several generations of engineering under the hood. Both can be true. The old layers are not simply junk — they contain compatibility, history and many years of work — but they can also make the next innovation harder.

A friend of mine named Anatoly, an evangelical Christian, once said something that stayed with me: "I know a person may betray me, but even if he does, I will forgive him."

I do not think this is a literal Bible quotation. The closest story may be Peter: Jesus knew Peter would deny him, but after it happened he restored the relationship and trusted him again.

I am not calling anyone here a betrayer, and I do not know the private history between Ryan and Bernhard. What stayed with me is the idea that forgiveness is not blindness. You can understand how someone may hurt you, speak honestly about what happened, and still leave the door open.

This discussion no longer feels like it is only about CSS or an admin theme. It contains years of work, trust, expectations and disappointment. Technical decisions should still be examined honestly, and the diagrams help with that. But I hope “I don’t think I have anything more to contribute” will not be the final word.

ProcessWire would lose something important if a technical and governance disagreement became a permanent separation between two people who have both given so much to it.

[Ivan Gretsky]

I am sure Maxim is right that the conversation here is really not about technology. But it is about psychology I would say. It so happened that several times in my life I have been in and around small businesses that reached their limit and had to make the next step to grow. They all had really similar problems. The main one was the reluctance of the man in charge to give up some control for the growth. And there usually were challengers that tried to push the change. New government structure. New goals. They were ambitious enough to stake everything on advancing their ideas. And the man in charge has rarely explicitly stated that he disagrees. But he always restricted those challengers citing concern for clients, employees, and the like. Most of the time the challengers had to leave the organization at some point. And it usually took some extraordinary circumstances for their ideas to be realized (mostly without them being onboard anymore anyway).

I was such a challenger a couple of times myself. I had been in a position of a man in charge and lost talented employees already. I now see it as a pattern. Right now I am in a kind of similar position with my son starting to confront me to get his freedom and grown-up status. This example is a little off track. But isn't PW Ryan's beloved creation and lifetime project? I can see how hard it is for me to let my son have his way. That must be the case with Ryan and PW too.

I think that ProcessWire has been in such a crisis several times already. And it never have chosen to grow before. Several talented challengers brought their passion and ideas to the table and had to leave (or to agree to the way things are going as myself) as the course of development was not going to change. Last time the challenger was (is?) Bernhard. He had and still has silent support among some of the respected and known community members. Who choose not to go all the way as they have seen this type of conflict several times already. But they are somehow vocal and speak up. Not as loud as Bernhard, but they do.

If it was all like before, Bernhard just leaves and everything comes back to slow peace again. But now it is different. Ryan himself is explicitly wanting change. Unfortunately, this happens due to traumatic events. But that is actually almost the only way the significant growth happens. It doesn't go smooth.

This time just might be the great chance for ProcessWire. Despite the hardships and resentment. In fact, only because of them. But yes, we need all the understanding and forgiveness we can get to take this chance. But not only that. We need to start doing things differently (that is the core of any change). I can see this difference in hearing each other and working together.

Easier said than done, right? But I have a plan:

1. Form a group of proactive community members ready to work together, and dedicate time to developing PW under Ryan's leadership.
2. Come up with a list of initial questions to discuss.
3. Gather this group on video call with someone playing a moderator role.
4. Work online and write down some initial plan with which we can all agree
5. Work on that plan together with regular meetings. Inform everyone.

My point is that those hard positions are not something to be afraid of. They are the basis of a possible growth. But you can't grow and stay small in the same time. I do believe that there is a bright future for ProcessWire. And I can see Ryan and all of us enjoy it.

[ryan]

For me it's always been about the design. How it makes its way into the output is an implementation detail. A detail that can change and evolve. A detail that I don't think matters that much in the short term or most users. Though a detail that clearly matters to some more than me. If someone thinks a different implementation would be better, great, then do it. ProcessWire supports multiple ways to theme/style the admin and I think that's a benefit, not a drawback. My aim is for PW to be flexible. AI could probably convert one strategy to another in minutes. 

I've got enough on my plate and if someone wants to make such a significant contribution as Konkat did, I welcome it. The same has been true with many of bernhards contributions. Both have contributed some of my favorite recent additions to PW. We are all doing the best we can with the time and resources we have. 

When bernhard submitted his AdminStyle system, I liked what it added and didn't insist that it be implemented in a particular way. Likewise when Konkat submitted their design for the admin. Front end CSS is not one of my strengths. I welcome the help, and prefer to leave these implementation details to the experts. In this case we've got experts that disagree, and one that thinks that's worth abandoning a project for. I personally think bernhard should stick around, and we all should accept that the community isn't always going to agree on everything, but that it is part of collaboration. 

[Pete]

@ryan somehow I missed your update here until just now - very sorry to hear what you're going through and happy to help out any way I can.

I've messaged you on Slack separately but also happy to talk through some PW feedback any time with some thoughts from another chap I've been working with. I'll maybe have time later next week when our kids are back in school after summer holidays here to put feedback/ideas together and, due various projects, I'm well behind I know on replying to a few people who will read this message so apologies there @Ivan Gretsky etc, I didn't mean to ghost anyone but I've been "spreading myself too thin" for several months again which was unintentional.