In reply to David Finch.

I'm sorry you feel like you're being ignored. That's not intentional, and we are absolutely listening to feedback.

We've built the plugin to what it is today in 4 months (the first 3 months of the year being the prototyping phase), and we are doing weekly releases and changelogs. It's just been a lot of work, and if we've seemed hard to reach, it's probably because we've been deep in building the thing.

None of us want to break existing sites. I wish this article had emphasized Matías response:

- If we detect a meta-box is registered we can fallback to the old interface, nothing changes.
- We could split editing the content and modifying meta information into two screens or stages.
- We can try to see how feasible it is to render these as they are (PHP) below the content: #2251.
- A theme/plugin/CPT could unregister the new interface as needed.
- Various items that relied on meta-boxes could be converted to blocks for UI (still storing data separately).
- We could implement API based meta-boxes extensibility like the Fields API.

Those are all options on the table for how Gutenberg could coexist with the ecosystem as it exists.

Our focus and our north star has always been to try and build an editor that would make someone who's never used WordPress before look at it and go "Oh, I want to write in that". If we do have to break backwards compatibility, we want it to be worth it. We're clearly not there yet.

Personally I don't consider Gutenberg being merged into core a done deal. I'm approaching it like any feature plugin probably should: we are doing our very best to build something that might some day get the blessing of the community.