[theme-reviewers] Theme Review Codex Page

[Chip Bennett]

The best I can suggest, unfortunately, is to read through the archives.

But then, I'm sure the active membership of the list is a very fluid group -
so it *never* hurts to bring up those kinds of questions again.

Chip

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <philip at frumph.net
> wrote:

>  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.
>
> - Phil
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> *To:* Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <philip at frumph.net> ;
> 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.
>
> Chip
>
> 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.
>>
>>
>> Cais.
>>
>>  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
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20100820/62b01cab/attachment-0001.htm>