[theme-reviewers] Discussion on suspension of old themes in the extend/themes

[Edward Caissie]

Yes, I agree for the most part with what Frumph and I discussed.

I'm fine with the time-line and cut-off dates; and agee the repository
should be "cleaned-up" and maintained with current themes.

My only real concern: suspension removes the theme from the current
repository (Extend/Themes) public facing pages, what is do be done with
these "suspended" themes and related files, etc. afterward


Cais.

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
philip at frumph.net> wrote:

>  After a lengthy discussion with Cais in the #wp-themes we've come to a
> conclusion that a 2 revision suspension would not be entirely justified and
> would harshly impact the themes available that still will work with the 3.0
> series albiet even if using deprecated and non standard code.
>
> We've thought about it and discussed the functionality of the wordpress
> themes and what they do and what revision base at this time would be best to
> spend anything of it and less then.
>
> Anything from december 2008 and before should be suspended for 'old and
> needs upgraded' themes, that is the release time when 2.7 came out, 2.7 was
> the the release that really gave themes something more then previous
> revisions that match more closely with with what 'works' in a theme.   It
> was in essence really 2.8, but 2.7 was the start of it.  So anything
> previous to the 2.7 release really can be considered old and needing
> updated.
>
> Then on the 3.1 release, do the 2.8 as the base and so on.
>
> The concern is the 'warning' to developers that when it will be happening
> and enough word out to them that it will be happening.  Giving ample time
> for developers who might want to 'rescue' old themes from the repository to
> revive them.
>
> Which brings up two thoughts, information needed to change ownership of
> said themes and ample time for developers to revive them.   And information
> theme developers that it's going to be happening.
>
> Me? I don't care, suspend em, if they want them back up, they resubmit
> them.
>
> Cais wants mass emails done, however collectively finding the authors
> emails would be a chore, let alone the fact that WordPress practically
> *never* mass emails and I doubt that it will ever happen, ever.  So
> alternatives need to be addressed as the following:
>
> So what's the minimal that should be done?
>
> A stickied post on the theme developement forum and a codex entry, in the
> most relevant places.
>
> What would be optimal?
>
> A post by Matt or the developers blog that gets seen in the RSS feed list
> of all wordpress sites, with the minimal post in the forum and codex entry
> information.
>
> The idea' is to not be 'harsh' about the suspension of said themes, hence
> to backtrack to the pre 2.7 release, which keeps WordPress in a good light,
> while still giving a couple weeks ample warning.
>
> ------ Side Note:
> Information about how to 'take over' an old theme, i.e. reviving it should
> be noted as well and that all old themes should have their original authors
> contacted then original author of said theme needs to email the repository
> theme admin requesting the ownership change, pretty much how it's already
> being done.
>
> Side effect of the removal/suspension would also be that when they resubmit
> they will be automatically added to the theme trac when resubmit, which is a
> goal that would benefit everyone.
>
> Additonal note: While the GPL Compatibility issue arose with the
> suspensions previously and there were some very vocal people about
> suspending the themes at that time, it was still done regardless of those
> complaints.   It was justified and responsible of the theme repository admin
> to do it.  It is the same with this;  The theme repository has an underlying
> responsibility to the end user to keep the repository up to date and in a
> manageable state to the end user.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100816/20b01c5b/attachment.htm>