[theme-reviewers] Fwd: Plugin territory

Mon Jun 17 22:45:43 UTC 2013

the Google Analyticator plugin is so awesome; there’s no comparison.

.. on the fence with SEO; I haven’t seen one that is done right.. yoast is close; but the biggest problem is ones like all-in-one generate the data for each and every thing on every page load; which is bad; that’s a lot of processing going on.   I think to be done right it needs to incorporate saving SEO data within meta fields and other things and not always regenerated on each page load.. 

Also, there’s the ‘load’ of the plugin which hasn’t been discussed; each plugin contains a higher memory footprint for each and every plugin that is loaded.    While little things like the google analytics code being so simple and all; having it as an increase in the memory footprint (execution time on server; mem used etc)  might actually be a benefit to the user.

Plugin (saves in data, generates extra resource for each plugin used) .. or one single line storing the Google Code which executes with the theme.. uh... yeah.

There are a couple services that some clients of mine are on that those users cannot have more then 4-5 plugins active because the footprint of wordpress is higher then the amount of memory those services give in available processing/memory.

From: Chip Bennett 
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:27 PM
To: [theme-reviewers] 
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Fwd: Plugin territory

No, I'm saying that a Theme option to allow the user to insert arbitrary scripts or custom CSS is perfectly fine, but that a Theme *instructing* the user to use that option to insert analytics code is not, because it is functionally equivalent to the Theme providing an option intentionally for inserting analytics code. 

We're not making their lives *more* complicated; we've making their lives *less* complicated - because analytics and SEO become a matter of "set and forget", regardless of what Theme is being used. (For the typical user, the question isn't *if* that user will switch Themes in the future, but rather *when* that user will switch Themes.) Further, I'll go out on a limb and say that a Plugin intended specifically for analytics code and/or SEO is going to be *better* coded, and *more* likely to be kept up-to-date, than analogous options in a given Theme.

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com> wrote:

  Chip- 

  Am I understanding you correctly that if a theme has an option called "add header script", that is OK, but if it has an option called "add analytics code to header" that is not OK, even though they do the exact same thing? That doesn't make sense.

  This requirement is making users add one more plugin to worry about updating, checking for incompatibilities with, etc. We're talking about a class of users that doesn't know to/ isin't comfortable doing something as simple as putting the tracking code in a function hooked to wp_header/footer or just cut and paste it into header.php. These aren't people who can evaluate a plugin to see if it is adding the analytics the right way or not... Why are we making their lives more complicated instead of judging the "add analytics" option the same way as the forbidden "add header script" option, which we allow as long as it is implemented properly?

  -Josh

  On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

    I would require the text to be changed, if it says "add your analytics code", since adding analytics code is Plugin territory.

    On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:

      some are labelled "add your analytics code" and some just "add your header/footer scripts".

      I approved them without pointing it out as i wasn't sure of the rule.

      On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

        How do you know that the end user will use them for that?

        On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:

          because they are used to add analytics scripts or similar to header/footer?

          On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

            Why would they? 

            (Not being sarcastic; I'm honestly asking.)

            On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:

              do textarea field's meant for header/footer scripts fall under plugin territory?

              On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

                Themes are always required to conform to the guidelines as current when the Theme is submitted. Guidelines can and do change, and previous reviews can and do miss required criteria. I would note all of the required issues, and hold the ticket open to allow for developer response.

                On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 1:03 PM, devcorn <wp at devcorn.com> wrote:

                  hi, 

                  I was reviewing one theme and it has so many.. many things which comes under plugin territory  shortcodes, SEO, download/upload... etc

                  But the theme was previously approved, actually always approved... so I don't know what should I do with it. I don't want to disappoint the author , I can approve it with note to fix all these stuff in next version, but to my surprise. I downloaded and test old version and they had all of it.. so I don't know if I missed something as I joined WTRT last week only.

                  Thanks
                  Ash

                  _______________________________________________
                  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

              _______________________________________________
              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

          _______________________________________________
          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

      _______________________________________________
      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

  _______________________________________________
  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/20130617/4c3235d9/attachment-0001.html>