[lelandriordan]

This plugin seems to solve a problem and target a market that doesn't exist. It is also dangerous since it relies on WordPress itself being reachable in the event of catastrophe.

WordPress users that aren't developers don't use VMs or update their site's code frequently. Typically they either use simple hosts like Dreamhost/Media Temple or managed hosts like Pressable/WP Engine that already integrate forms of easy backup. If they don't there are a [plethora of backup plugins](http://premium.wpmudev.org/blog/free-wordpress-backup-plugin...) and [services](http://vaultpress.com/) that not only cover code but also the DB. And since these novice users rarely change their site's code, they have no reason to use version control in the first place.

At the other end of the spectrum, WordPress developers don't need this either. Git is pre-installed on most VMs and integrated into almost all the major cloud providers and staging sites take 10 minutes to set up. And most importantly they are abstracted from WordPress itself making them way more secure. For example, what if the admin becomes unreachable after a hack? Doesn't this defeat the entire purpose of Versionpress since you won't be able to access the plugin page to revert back? Combining backup and version control together in the WordPress admin is a recipe for disaster.

Lastly, whats the point of raising $30K since this is a premium plugin that's almost done anyway? If the picture isn't a rendering, then it seems like the plugin is already well under development. Isn't this more like a presale?

[pknight]

I am also skeptical of this plugin but I think almost all of your points are moot.

There is big market for a solution that lets users backup and restore the filesystem and a database on a more granular level. Not being able to easily and conveniently revert changes that are made easily is one of the biggest pain points in managing a WordPress site. If you update WordPress and find that a critical plugin doesn't work, there is no convenient way to undo the update. Of course, ideally, these kinds of things are tested on a staging server first, but the truth is only a minority of sites utilize a staging server in this manner.

A lot of pain around websites is dealing with changes to the filesytem and database. To have a simple way of tracking changes and reverting changes is a boon. Both normal end-users and developers will jump for joy with a unified tool for this.

You can't compare this with many of the existing backup solutions either. You get far more detail (which helps with debugging) and far more incremental control when you have something git-like managing it all.

I'm pretty sure the solution would not be dependent on being accessible from a site's WP backend. But then, I don't know the specifics yet.

I don't see the problem raising money through crowdfunding for this either, from their point of view. It's a sound business strategy that validates a market and provides some investment.

My hesitation is this, we have no idea if they even have the skills to pull something like this off. Because it's not going to be easy. The WP environment can really vary from one site to the next (different server setups/different plugins/themes etc) and you have to make it work on them all. That's just a huge undertaking. I think you'd need a pretty big team with a ton of experience and a lot more than 30k to get close to pulling it off.

[borekb]

Thanks, that answers many points very well. VersionPress seems to interest many people so hopefully we'll get chance to properly build it.

You also seem to be very realistic about how large this undertaking is - you're right and we know how big of a thing we're trying to build. That's why we're realistic about our goals for v1 and don't promise more than we can deliver. To support all the complex 3rd party plugins and various hosting environments is something that will come over time. But we have to start somewhere and we believe that we are approaching the problem from the right angle. Thanks!

[elicash]

So much hating.

If they don't meet the goal, then maybe you're right that there's no market for it. If they do, then you're likely wrong. Why not just wait and see rather than declare it a failure?

It's not "dangerous" in a catastrophe because it doesn't take away any options that already exist.

And presumably they're raising money because it costs them money to live and work on a project.

[vlunkr]

My thoughts exactly. I feel the same way about the numerous GUI clients that are supposed to save you ever using git on the command line. Non-developers don't understand/want git, and developers, even ones that don't use the command line often, will find that the basics git commands are really simple.