[theme-reviewers] Bundling Plugins
Philip Walton
philip at philipwalton.com
Mon May 2 15:15:46 UTC 2011
This is probably not feasible anytime in the near future, but it seems
to me that plugin-dependency (and the appropriate dependency checking)
should be a WordPress feature and not left open to the theme authors.
Put another way, WordPress should have a way to inform the user that a
particular theme cannot be activated if a particular plugin isn't
already activated and installed.
I'd bet we'd all agree that the best way to have plugin X's
functionality within theme Y is for the user to actually download plugin
X and theme Y. The only reason it's currently bundled with the theme is
to not add any extra inconvenience/confusion and to minimize any
additional roadblocks between downloading the theme and actually using it.
I'm not suggesting this be implemented now, and we could certainly come
up with best-practices in the meantime, but (if everyone agrees) perhaps
we could push to have this implemented in core.
Thoughts?
On 5/2/11 6:56 AM, Chip Bennett wrote:
> I would suggest that bundled Plugins should keep their original
> function names, in order to perform proper
> function_exists/conflict-checking. Plugin *code* that is
> *incorporated* should adopt the Theme's function-naming convention.
>
> (The same should hold true for textdomain. A bundled,
> translation-ready Plugin should already be declaring its own
> namespace, and should have appropriate language files included.
> Incorporated code, on the other hand, wouldn't - and so should have
> its translation also incorporated into the Theme.)
>
> Also, in both cases, the bundling/incorporation must be noted, with
> proper copyright notice retained for the original code.
>
> Beyond those points: establishing some "best practices" would be a
> good idea.
>
> Chip
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Edward Caissie
> <edward.caissie at gmail.com <mailto:edward.caissie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I would suggest putting forward a "best practice" method for
> bundling plugins to insure their inclusion is relatively future
> proof. As noted, generally speaking the code is GPL so that is the
> not the issues; but, keep in mind, do the bundled plugins hold to
> the "namespace" and "textdomain" requirements?
>
> Once the Theme author makes all of those adjustments the bundled
> plugins may become no more than a very extensive functions.php file.
>
> Just some thoughts ...
>
>
> Cais.
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:29 AM, James Laws <jamielaws at gmail.com
> <mailto:jamielaws at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Yeah, my comment sounded like a license issue but I really
> meant it from a repository/end user and support perspective.
>
> James
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Chip Bennett
> <chip at chipbennett.net <mailto:chip at chipbennett.net>> wrote:
>
> From a GPL perspective, there's absolutely nothing wrong
> with it. The question is: what is appropriate/best for the
> repository/end user?
>
> Chip
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:05 AM, James Laws
> <jamielaws at gmail.com <mailto:jamielaws at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I think this is a sticky subject. I'm not sure
> I'm comfortable with it honestly. It's one thing to
> offer your own custom theme options but it's another
> thing altogether to bundle, in most cases,
> someone else's plugin. Not sure how I feel about that.
>
> James
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Chip Bennett
> <chip at chipbennett.net <mailto:chip at chipbennett.net>>
> wrote:
>
> This is probably a good topic for a wider discussion.
>
> My initial thought is that *simple* Plugin
> functionality (e.g. breadcrumbs) being *properly
> incorporated* (i.e. not simply being bundled, and
> with proper function_exists checking for the
> original) is acceptable. But at some point, the
> complexity of the Plugin (e.g. Yoast SEO) should
> preclude it from being incorporated into the Theme.
>
> Chip
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Emil Uzelac
> <emil at themeid.com <mailto:emil at themeid.com>> wrote:
>
> If the plugin is properly implemented there
> should be no problems. For example Coraline
> Theme implemented Theme options based on a
> plugin, so it's OK. Yoast Breadcrumbs are
> still current
> http://yoast.com/wordpress/breadcrumbs/ and I
> am not sure about
> http://themes.svn.wordpress.org/billions/1.1.2/core/plugins/seo-features.php.
> Now there is one thing to pay attention to and
> that is if they can be disabled (turned off)
> from i.e. Theme Options, just in case that
> user wants to use something else. I am sure
> that breadcrumb will not cause issues, however
> meta plugin could if the user installs any
> other SEO plugin. If one is "hardcoded" and
> other one installed as "real" plugin from
> plugins they could affect each other and or
> create double meta tags,
>
> Cheers,
> Emil
>
>
> *----*
> *Emil Uzelac* | ThemeID | T: 224-444-0006
> <tel:224-444-0006> | Twitter: @EmilUzelac | E:
> emil at themeid.com <mailto:emil at themeid.com> |
> http://themeid.com <http://themeid.com/>
> Make everything as simple as possible, but not
> simpler. - Albert Einstein
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 11:00 PM, Vicky
> Arulsingam <vicky.arulsingam at gmail.com
> <mailto:vicky.arulsingam at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> What's the official word on themes
> bundling plugins? The theme I'm currently
> reviewing
> (http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/3398)
> is including Yoast Breadcrumbs and Add
> Meta Tags as part of the download package.
>
>
> -----
> Vicky Arulsingam
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> <mailto: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/20110502/0b099bf2/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the theme-reviewers
mailing list