[wp-hackers] the home.php problem: does it asks for a posts.php?
leogermani at gmail.com
Thu Aug 30 16:57:10 UTC 2012
The vas majority of the users may want us not to touch that options. But by
"user" we are assuming someone who manages his site, tweak options and
change themes. Ok.
But the vas majority of developers who use WordPress to build regular sites
for their clients will want to set up a custom front page and, in that
case, will have to set up 2 dummy pages as placeholders.
The point I was bringing up is to give the tools for this developer to do
this without the dummy pages and the problems we've discussed here.
(alerting upon editing/deletion is a weak workaround in my opinion...).
Themes already interfere on how things will be displayed (does it support
custom headers? does it support nav_menus, sidebars, etc). I beleive this
could be an option for the developer, perhaps using add_theme_support()...
Vinicius and I wroked in a plugin that does what we are proposing:
https://github.com/vmassuchetto/wordpress-force-front-page/ (we didnt find
a good name yet....)
If there is a front-page.php file it will get rid of the "Front Page
Displays" option from the Reading Settings and add an option in the
permalink page to setup your blog address. It does not touch the template
hierarchy, you still may use home.php or index.php for your blog, while
front-page.php will be used to display the root of your website.
We also started working in a way to add these 2 links (home and blog) to
the Nav Menus page in the admin, so you can add them to your menus. Its in
Im gonna join the discussion at the trac, cause I saw there people who have
the same needs and maybe want to join the discussion, since this is not
exactly the point there.
ps - I assume the guilt of making this discussion so long and out of focus
because of my lame first email. sorry all.
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Justin Tadlock
<justin at justintadlock.com>wrote:
> Sorry if I came off as rude asking you a legitimate question and telling
> you that I didn't understand you. I realize that not everyone here is a
> native English speaker, so some text can be easily misinterpreted. It was
> not my intention to be unfriendly.
> I see now what you meant, so thank you for explaining that. It just
> doesn't further the discussion in any way to me. I was simply trying to
> explain to you what Chip meant by "vast majority".
> On 8/29/2012 8:22 AM, Cátia Kitahara wrote:
>> I'm truly failing to see how any of what you just wrote has to do with
>>> what I wrote. Copy/paste error in your reply?
>>> No, it wasn't an error, maybe yes I'm failling to understand you, the
>> opposite is true too, thoug. But there's no need to be so rude. I'm new
>> here, but I'm not new to the WordPress community. Please, let's be more
>> If not, I'm guessing you just misunderstood Chip's point about how
>>> *themes* should not dictate the structure of a site for the vast
>>> majority of users. It's about who controls the site, not what type of
>>> site they run.
>>> I'm not saying this, I'm saying that by the type of site they run I'm
>> to figure out who controls the site!
>> when he said "vast majority".
>>>>> * The vast majority of users control their own WordPress setup.
>>>> And aren't they the kind of users which have personal blogs and small
>>> The type of users who control their own WordPress setup are the type of
>> users who generally have small businesses or personal sites. That's what
>> I'm saying.
>> * The minority of users have developers set up their site.
>>>> And this kind of users aren't bigger businesses, governments, non
>>>> etc., who can afford developers?
>>> The type of users who have developers set up their sites are the type of
>> users who are paying developers, therefore I understand that usually these
>> users are bigger businesses, governments or non profits, though not
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.**com <wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com>
More information about the wp-hackers