[theme-reviewers] My First Suggest-Approval *sniff*
chip at chipbennett.net
Sun Sep 12 22:54:29 UTC 2010
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> > From a Reviewer perspective, I think this is the wrong question.
> > It will become incredibly onerous on the Theme Reviewers to keep track of
> > which deprecated functions are deprecated enough not to allow, versus
> > that are just sorta kinda deprecated, and are still allowed.
> I'm going to go with Nacin on this and add in this idea: A usage of a
> deprecated call shouldn't be a cause for *rejection* in a 1.0 theme...
> But it's something that should be fixed for a 1.1.
Except that even Nacin said that using user caps should not be allowed at
all. I assume that would apply even to 1.0 Themes.
> The idea here is that if you eliminate a theme from being in the repo
> at all for relatively minor things, then you eliminate the incentive
> for the theme author to improve.
> Consider the audience. We do want good looking and quality themes, but
> we also don't want to make theme authors feel that the requirements
> are too onerous to abide by.
> How is it onerous to test a Theme with Log Deprecated Notices, and
implement the suggested function change? I argue that it is not at all
By contrast, using a deprecated function from the outset is the polar
opposite of "good quality".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the theme-reviewers