[theme-reviewers] Theme Update Review

Wed Oct 30 19:35:22 UTC 2013

No problem, was only putting an idea in the mix...

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:04 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> I don't think there's a way to do that, and I don't think any of the
> admins would be on-board with it, even if we could.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>
>> If you lock all but #1 till #1 is cleared that is a "punishment".
>>
>> #1 priority should be prioritized, but we don't need to force
>> volunteers to review #1 first.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I too did not understand how its punishing theme authors.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>>
>>>> He replied to:
>>>>
>>>> If Otto/Nacin can lock down #2/#3/#4 till #1 is empty, that may work
>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm sorry, but I have no clue what you mean by "punishing Theme
>>>>> authors"?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Jasper Kips <jasper at planetkips.nl>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So, punishing theme authors....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jasper Kips,
>>>>>> Always waiting for the ricochet
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Op 30 okt. 2013 om 19:54 heeft Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> het volgende geschreven:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If Otto/Nacin can lock down #2/#3/#4 till #1 is empty, that may work
>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would hate to have to put a stipulation on the review incentive,
>>>>>>> along the lines of requiring that the daily average # of Themes in Priority
>>>>>>> #1 queue must be less than the daily average # of Themes in the Priority
>>>>>>> #3/4 queues, but if Priority #1 keeps getting bypassed, we may have to go
>>>>>>> that route.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As much as I would love to add a second incentive to the Priority #1
>>>>>>> queue, it shouldn't be *required* to do so, just to ensure that reviewers
>>>>>>> adhere to the ticket prioritization.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #1 Priority should always be prioritized and that's something we
>>>>>>>> have been
>>>>>>>> preaching for awhile now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the same time once assigned it should be reviewed asap, not
>>>>>>>> tomorrow,
>>>>>>>> not within 7 days.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The past few #1 assignments might be new reviewers, however they're
>>>>>>>> experienced themers and as far as I know we do not assign #1 to
>>>>>>>> newbies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> System is not broken and we just need to give some time, that's all
>>>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Bruce Wampler <
>>>>>>>> weavertheme at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It turns out the reviewer did not have his notifications set
>>>>>>>>> properly, and didn't even know he had been assigned the theme.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And I was not talking about standard theme reviews - but reviews
>>>>>>>>> for Priority 1 themes. As I noted, these often contain important bug fixes
>>>>>>>>> (although that should probably be pointed out when the theme is submitted),
>>>>>>>>> and I didn't think Priority 1 themes were supposed to get the same
>>>>>>>>> treatment as the rest of the themes in the queue. That is why Priority 1
>>>>>>>>> was created.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And at one point, I thought only experienced reviewers were
>>>>>>>>> supposed to handle Priority 1 themes - there was a big push not that long
>>>>>>>>> ago to try to get Priority 1 themes pushed through. But it seems now that
>>>>>>>>> with all the incentives, the new themes are getting pushed through faster
>>>>>>>>> than existing themes that are simply updating.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think this need fixing. I understand everyone is a volunteer,
>>>>>>>>> but all the previous efforts for the Priority 1 themes seems to be broken
>>>>>>>>> now:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Apparently new reviewers are now getting assigned Priority 1
>>>>>>>>> themes. In at least my case, this led to a several days delay because the
>>>>>>>>> new reviewer was not yet totally familiar with the process.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. But Priority 1 reviews are now the slowest to get reviews. New
>>>>>>>>> themes seem to be flowing smoothly through the process faster than existing
>>>>>>>>> themes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 3. Maybe there needs to be a mechanism for indicating critical bug
>>>>>>>>> updates. It happens, and what is now about a two week turnaround for a
>>>>>>>>> theme update seems too long - especially given new themes are getting
>>>>>>>>> through faster.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I appreciate everyone's effort - and I'm perfectly happy to wait
>>>>>>>>> my turn. It just seems that things are broken for Priority 1 themes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Christine Rondeau <
>>>>>>>>> christine at bluelimemedia.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That's happened to me before as well. Once someone takes your
>>>>>>>>>> site and reviews it, doesn't mean they will do it in a day. I once had to
>>>>>>>>>> wait for a week for someone to complete the review.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  I think that's normal, we all have things to do.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> **Christine Rondeau
>>>>>>>>>> Bluelime Media <http://www.bluelimemedia.com>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131031/e9caebe7/attachment-0001.html>