[theme-reviewers] Requesting reconsideration of Pronto theme for wordpress

[yulian yordanov]

  Hi,

I'm the reviewer who rejected Pronto. The decision was not easy, because 
the theme passes all tests. As a tester I have to be sure that it does 
not contain spam-links or other malicious code; but with this file 
structure and highly unreadable code I can not recommend using such theme.

Sorry, it's not personally against you or Pronto them as functions. In 
fact, I admire that you managed to implement so many features in one theme.

The good thing in this situation is that I'm not the man who take the 
last decision. I'm just a tertiary volunteer reviewer and theme 
developer like you (my theme http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/redline )

Regards
Yulian <Fingli>


На 24.8.2010 19:23, Cedric Legras написа:
> Hello,
>
> I have submitted my theme and it was rejected because it is too complicated.
> I tend to agree since you need to know css and php.
> However, if you know those languages and like to customize and control your theme, Pronto have some cool featured.
> First the style is separated (see folder styles) so you can quickly change and modified the whole look very quickly (the editor have a nice filter for css) and will check for parsing error for the php file. Actually this folder (styles) is the only one to customize the theme.
> And with this separation, compare to other themes, you know exactly what to change (since there only few KB). If you make a mistake it take 1 click to come back to the previous configuration.
> If you want hooked your own function (add_action in my-functions.php) there is also a nice option for a visual help. Very unique and very efficient. No more guessing where it will be hooked.
> You can also upload files (such as images, or a whole new styles create from your computer)
> The layout is ultra flexible (1-2-3-f), the comments are also nicely 'ajaxed' to save Bandwidth.
> Etc... lot of featured which will be naturally improved in future updated.
>
> I really like to see some reconsideration for Pronto.
>
> Thanks,
> Cedric
>
>
> =>  The file structure is too different (complicated) for a standard WordPress? theme. Unable to trace the relationships in code between all these files and folders.
>
> / At least this theme needs a good Readme where to be described how it works.
>
> Just for illustration:
> the пьсх index.php contains only this -
>
> <?php
> cjL_body();
> ?>
>
> - Developer needs to thoroughly read the  http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review and find all the must-haves and update their theme(s) accordingly, this theme will continue to not pass until all requirements are met.
> - It's useful if the authors check their themes with set WP_DEBUG to 'true' in wp-config.php
>
> Items marked with =>  are reasons for not being approved
> Items marked with / are just suggestions
>
> This is a tertiary review, enough items didn't pass; Next reviewer might find more so please do everything you can to adhere to the documentation on what is accepted in the theme review.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org [mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 10:09 PM
> To: pronto at legras.com
> Subject: [WordPress Themes] Pronto, new version 0.72
>
> Thank you for uploading version 0.72 of Pronto.
>
> Feedback will be provided at http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/815
>
> --
> The WordPress.org Themes Team
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers

-- 
Юлиян Йорданов

Yulian Yordanov
http://post-scriptum.info/