Integrations ALWAYS end wrong, this is why the core components must be made in house.
Before Ghost get focus on those who makes money with their content, there was no reason to consider the comments as core, at least other than be comparison with WordPress that has it for being a true Blog (Ghost is not a blog but a simple CMS).
But now, Ghost have to consider:
Creators ARE NOT web developers, they want a solution in a simple point, they will not integrate or want to learn other product than that used to post their content, as WordPress does.
It is required a reliable service with Ghost control of the main features, lets thing I am a publisher/entrepreneur with not IT support and I hire Ghost, then my content gets broken because of a Discuss failure or a Coral Talk upgrade, he contacts them and they tell it is Ghost, so he goes to Ghost to realise the problem is not there while he is loosing money and getting complains with every minute his website is not as his members expect (I have seen this thousand of times).
It is clear Ghost team does not want to make the comment system, using the excuse that it will affect the performance. I suggest them to do not be afraid, the members module was a great idea, but it came with a cost so face it, I think you have can make it well.
Itâs the other way around: WordPress is an overly complicated CMS, which can be a blog. Ghost is a blog, but it has no interest in being a complicated CMS.
Well a Blog is a CMS because both are used to post, but to be a Blog you need a comment system in your core. WordPress is a Blog but its plugins made it complicated, the same happens with Ghost, which is complicated because it depends of integrations, just like WP depends of plugins.
For this reason Ghost(Pro) must include the most important features in its core, (to avoid the problems with plugins/integrations) as it does with the member module, and if it wants to honestly be compared with WordPress, it needs to be a Blog and include the comment system in the core too.
I know Ghost team decided to do not develop the comment system and they choose the performance excuse to justify the decision , but this is technically and practically false. I guess it would be more honest to tell they do not have the skills to make it, I am sure there will be a lot of volunteers to help, or simply tell they do not want to, letting the users to choose a better solution for their needs.
We always listen to the community, however we would appreciate it if you used Ghost for a little longer before providing feedback . However youâre right, people should use the best tool for their needs. Ghost is more of a precision tool, not a Swiss Army knife.
What is the point to post in here that I am new in Ghost 3.0? How does it contribute to the âNative comments systemâ module? I will tell you, when someone does not like the true, when his thoughts do not match with the facts, he tries to discredit the person who brings them to the conversation.
However, nobody needs even to use Ghost to understand:
It is not a Blog. Your features list shows this.
It is complex because it depends of integrations. Your home page have this.
You do not want to include the Comment System . You comment this.
Even with all the time you have used Ghost, you do not realise:
It is not a precision tool any more. Ghost(Pro) is a tool to make money (I invite you to use the calculator in the web page) and you must provide the tools for this.
You choose to enter in mayor leagues, you are not a nice and simple CMS. You are comparing yourself not only with WordPress but with Patreon, both leaders of the market.
Including the comment system in the core, does not make Ghost a Swiss Army Knife, this just makes Ghost a BlogâŚ
While I always appreciate new features, I think detouring into native comments would be disastrous for Ghost and, by extension, the community. As others have mentioned, comments represent a whole different product with its own technical overhead. Itâs the simple comparative advantage that comes with specialization.
Itâs especially unnecessary, since there are several other comment plug-ins available, both external as a simple plugin (like Disqus) and self-hosted, like Discourse.
Since it sounds like you are interested in a self-hosted solution, I HIGHLY recommend Discourse. Itâs actually what this very forum uses. They are a prime example of an active development community and they are thriving.
To enable comments in your posts, you simply drop in a small section of JavaScript into the post.hbs template, which Discourse guides you through. It has the added bonus that new posts are automatically added as a new thread in your Discourse discussion board. For users who sign up, they can also receive email digests which can then serve to notify them of new blog posts. In this way, Discourse can actually become its own subscription management system. And you gain a discussion forum to boot! Itâs fantastic.
Discourse also supports integration with SSO providers such as Google, Twitter, Facebook, etc., so signing up is extremely easy for users. It also supports anti-spam plugins.
As you kindly explain, Discourse is a forum (this is also in their home page), Discourse is not a comments system..
Indeed there are real Blogs around, also good comments systems, or professional FMS with fully featured Blog modules or fully featured membership systems, but it is not the case to mention them because here the point is to improve Ghost by including a native comment system in it.
âWhat features and additional value do you think the Ghost team could add that would make their homegrown comments module superior to the already widely-used and widely-available third-party comments providers?â
Coming from the development perspective (not Ghost), R&D is all about prioritization, and the smaller you are, the smarter you have to be about that prioritization. The dozens, if not hundreds of man-hours spent on development for such a module, represents a huge opportunity cost that could have been spent elsewhere. What additional advantage would you expect out of a comments module, directly from Ghost, compared to entire corporations (like Disqus) who have dozens of developers dedicated to this one task?
Determining the real, underlying request is whatâs needed here. Is there some problem that users are having with integrating a third-party comments provider? If so, what is it? We may be able to help there. (âWeâ as in the Community, not volunteering Ghost R&D for anything ).
I think what @DavidDarnes is getting at, is that youâve posted on a few different threads here asking for features that arenât part of Ghost (and may never be). So it begs the question: is Ghost the best fit for the requirements of your website? If you use it for a while and feel those missing features arenât important, then thatâs great.
However, if you feel your site is instead lacking, then Ghost may not be the best tool for the job. Thatâs OK too. Thereâs no point trying to put a square peg in a round hole, as the saying goes.
I personally came across Ghost around the same time I was launching my last project. I was very keen to make it work, but it quickly appeared to me that those missing features would be an issue for what I was trying to achieve. So I used WordPress instead. But with my latest project, it was clear Ghost was a good fit, so I used that instead.
Not every tool/app/framework/etc will be suitable for every task 100% of the time. And thatâs OK.
I understand what you say, but the subject of the post is âNative comments systemâ. We (those who consider this as a good feature in Ghost), are providing the facts to support such feature.
It is fine to know that you are able to manage Ghost and WordPress and I am sure many in here are able to implement other more complex solutions, but, accordingly to the forum guidelines, his comment as well as yours are not in the right place.
Lets think binary, Ghost team wants to make a comment system: 0 (no).
Do you see how easy is. This is more honest that attract the users who think some day it will be there, as those who expected to see it in version 3.0.
Also stop telling such will decrease Ghost performance, I am sure here are many developers with plenty years of experience knowing it is false.
Simply stop comparing Ghost with WordPress because they are not the same thing. Ghost should be compared with other CMS to avoid bad surprises from the âpublishersâ and âentrepreneursâ.
It would be great Ghost team to stop laying to the people or build a comment system
Yes, this is a thread of community members asking for comments to be implemented in core. Thereâs some arguments for and against. Regardless, as has been pointed out, thereâs already a number of alternative third-party options you can use today. Even if Ghost were to commit to doing this, theyâre a tiny team of 16 people and it would take a long time to deliver â properly. Youâre either stuck waiting for an unknown period of time without comments in the hope the feature will ship, or using one of the existing integrations, or using another platform.
Itâs true that WordPress has comments in core. Theyâre also a multinational corporation with thousands of staff. Their ability to deliver features in X days is not comparable.
Feature prioritisation is alluded to in this thread:
The FAQ explicitly does say theyâre not supported. I donât see how reading that, you would assume this feature exists, so there shouldnât be any bad surprises.
There is no need to call people liars. Nobody from the Ghost team made an explicit promise to deliver comments in core, and the rest of us are just ordinary users like yourself.
Thanks for the thoughtful response @StuartMorrisAU - very well put
Weâre aware that some people are very passionate about comments, though itâs rather ironic when the people who want comments most behave in a manner which illustrates the reason for why many sites donât want them.
Everyone is very welcome to continue to vote on this topic to show their support, but I think weâll close the discussion here. Everyone has had lots of time to make their points, and weâll certainly take the feedback on board as we prioritise our roadmap.
Actually, I think now we need native comments system for Ghost. Once I asked a lot of my friends, âwhy are you choosing WordPress over Ghost, Ghost is a powerful platform.â they told me the only reason is Ghost doesnât have a comment and react system, we have to pay or host a comment system.
Agree - there doesnât seem to be any good commenting system to integrate with ghost.
Cove.chat has the best integration given the users carry over, but it lacks a lot of features and seems way too bare bones.
A big thing Ghost can do to increase blog engagement would be to integrate comments and let users hit a button in the newsletter that takes them to the websiteâs comment box on that particular post
Hi all, I agree having native comments on Ghost could be beneficial for some sites.
However, most WP sites donât use native comments. Instead, they use plugins. And those plugins are either paid or a privacy nightmare. So, the argument isnât fair on why someone would pick WP over Ghost because of it.
And another thing to consider is most articles donât have any comments. Heck, most sites only get spam comments.
So, Iâm not sure comments are one thing to be on top of the list for developing next for Ghost.
Today we shipped native comments for Ghost, now available to everyone:
All the things that @StuartMorrisAU mentioned previously in this thread still hold true. The main thing thatâs changed in the last few years is that the full-time Ghost team is now 30+ people, so we have more ability to work on large/complex features and deliver them to a high standard.
This has been a long awaited feature for lots of you, and we appreciate your patience while we took the time to do it justice.
For more context and details about how (and why) weâre launching comments, now, check out the post above :)