[wp-hackers] Putting the P in WordPress

Gavin Pearce Gavin.Pearce at 3seven9.com
Tue Jul 6 18:32:55 UTC 2010


I'd like to see the logic behind the decision to include this function
detailed by the core team - and the pros weighed up against the cons.

If someone from the core team can explain the process behind putting
this in - or was it just chucked in on the fly...

As I see it:

Everyone spells WordPress in the way Matt likes (v. minor issue).

Core code starts to affect the textual output of blogs.
Core code breaks URI paths for some sites (major issue).

This question keeps getting ignored, so to make it a bit clearer....

What do we *gain* with this function to make all Wordpress = WordPress,
except for the added overhead and complications?

What's in it for the WordPress community?


-----Original Message-----
From: wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com
[mailto:wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com] On Behalf Of
Christopher O'Connell
Sent: 06 July 2010 19:14
To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] Putting the P in WordPress

The P function is horrendously offensive and improper, but that is
compared to the way in which this is being treated by the core team. I
shan't rehash all of the arguments, others have said it far more
than I.

But, Matt, the difference between disagreement and disregard is that
one disagrees one still takes a moment to consider the pros- and cons-
ones argument.

The P function is a purely self-aggrandizing decree -- the sort of
and abuse that I had resonably hoped the WP community had moved beyond.
the Wall Stree Journal states in their editorial philosophy

[We stand] against ... the ukases of kings and other collectivists; and
individual autonomy against dictators, bullies and even the tempers of
momentary majorities.

WordPress is meant to be a community, and the reason this has people red
with rage, writing, instead of hacking, is because they are rightly
with disgust and horror at such low action.

~ Christopher

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Matt Mullenweg <m at mullenweg.com> wrote:

> On 7/6/2010 1:30 PM, eric at eamann.com wrote:
>> Some time ago I wrote a patch in response to a user's request that we
>> Skype
>> and Facebook and LinkedIn and other fields to the profile page ... it
>> rejected because "There's a filter there, which means a plugin can
>> control all of this." (ticket #11367)  It makes sense that we not
>> additional (trivial) functionality like this into core ... it made
>> there
>> and it still makes sense now.
> For what it's worth, I think it would be nice to modernize those
> and even go a step further to authenticate them where possible. I
would have
> said so if I had seen that ticket.
>  It doesn't paint a pretty picture of the core teams' opinion of the
>> of the
>> community ...
> One of the core tenets of Open Source development is that people can
> disagree, strongly, but still respect each other.
> --
> Matt Mullenweg
> http://ma.tt | http://wordpress.org | http://automattic.com
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
wp-hackers mailing list
wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list