[theme-reviewers] WPTRT = TSA?

[Edward Caissie]

Just recapping the above discussion for my own clarification ...


   - Child-Themes are an eventuality, the time-line is the only real unknown
   at this point.
   - Child-Theme Guidelines should to be sorted out by the above time-line
   (-1 ideally)
   - Theme Author SVN access for "known" authors
      - Trial with WPTRT?
      - We need to address the existing repository (pre-WPTRT) Themes and
   how best to handle them going forward
      - "Adoption" program, as in ownership transfer?
      - Combine with upcoming Child-Theme introduction and implementation?
      - Make inaccessable via the current Extend repo (i.e: suspend or
      "Move") after a certain age?
   - Commision designs for the WPTRT Uniform and badges in a much more
   fashionable style than the TSA
      - Issue challenge coins!

Of course, the last point/sub-point are the most important issues to be
discussed but I imagine we could focus on the first points to start with
(*grin*)


Cais.

PS: Looks like the makings of a WPTRT meeting agenda ...

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> Well fair enough, then... I withdraw my philosophical complaint. :)
>
> Chip
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Except that, by *what*, I really mean *if*: as in, is it a foregone
>> > conclusion that Child Themes will be in the Repository?
>>
>> I'm more focusing on making it capable of doing it. Guidelines on what
>> are kinda your problem. ;)
>>
>> But yes, child themes will be allowed eventually. The reasons have
>> been technical, not philosophical.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>> wrote:
>> > Originally, Child Themes were intended to be *update-proof*, not "more
>> > update-proof", than (stand-alone) Themes. They were intended as a way
>> for
>> > the *end user* to add Theme modifications that would be retained when
>> the
>> > Parent Theme was updated.
>>
>> Yeah, I thought that too, and said so last week. Matt corrected me,
>> and said that that was not the intended purpose of child themes. The
>> intended purpose was to allow themes to be extended, as they were
>> doing lots of CSS-only type competitions at the time (with things like
>> the Sandbox theme and so on), and child themes were intended to
>> facilitate that.
>>
>> In Matt's words (or pretty close, I was not recording at the time):
>> "if we had intended to make themes capable of retaining modifications
>> through upgrades, we've have done it differently".
>>
>> So yes, child themes are not end-user-only from the .org's
>> perspective, and will be allowed in the repo, eventually.
>>
>> -Otto
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20110120/9cbd43dd/attachment.htm>