[theme-reviewers] Theme Review Codex Page
Philip M. Hofer (Frumph)
philip at frumph.net
Sat Aug 21 01:19:02 UTC 2010
Glad to know .. I wish someone would have an itemized list of end-results someplace about those discussions and what was determined so that the questions I have don't keep coming up.
----- Original Message -----
From: Chip Bennett
To: Edward Caissie
Cc: Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) ; theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Theme Review Codex Page
This all got hashed out right when the list and group started getting off the ground.
I'm open to/fine with revising that conclusion, but at the time the group decided that it was best for repository-hosted Themes to support all core features.
Ironically, I originally sided with the school of thought that simple, yet well-coded Themes should be allowed in the repository - but others' arguments convinced me that it would be better for repository-hosted Themes to be "best of the best" with respect to quality, and also, since the repository is linked from within the WordPress backend, to support all core features.
As always, I'm open to re-visiting that discussion - but that's where we ended up back then.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:12 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
As I replied earlier, there are items that I want to digest further ... everything under WP2.9 for example.
I see those as optional, nice to be able to include but mandatory, no.
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <philip at frumph.net> wrote:
So a theme MUST support post-thumbnails ... I would consider that to be an optional..
Yes/No? on MUST support.
theme-reviewers mailing list
theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the theme-reviewers