[theme-reviewers] New Ticket Resolution

Edward Caissie edward.caissie at gmail.com
Thu Oct 14 16:15:05 UTC 2010

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> AFAIK, either we enforce them, or we don't.

If that is our method then there are no "minor" issues ... and quite simply
that is the crux of the matter.

The guideline needs to be strongly adhered to with a "black or white"
premise but that does not preclude reasonable exceptions and as you are want
to describe "selective enforcement", or in my mind reasonable
interpretations of the Theme Review page(s) to meet the requirements as they
are expected to be met.

Would I ignore the current license requirement as you are quoting, in a
word: Yes. Would I ignore the complete lack of any sort of GPL-compliance
declaration, again in a word: No. If the author has chosen another method to
declare the theme GPL compliant that resembles the quote above, then I would
likely accept it and most likely suggest they use what the Theme Review
page(s) state should be used (at this time). We have already decided that
will be changing to something much more "blank and white" in the (near)

Rather than continually re-hashing this particular point we should be
addressing the future requirements of the GPL compatible license
declaration(s) and putting that forward.

Also to the CSS requirements ... once "FixPress" is not required to have a
standard default WordPress installation using the most current Theme Unit
Test data pass the validation test(s) I will be happy to re-consider setting
a resolution  of "not-approved" based on minor CSS issues, until then I will
remain using, as you like to refer to it, "selective enforcement".

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20101014/deb9eb11/attachment.htm>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list