[theme-reviewers] What is wrong with you people? YourejectedTarski?

[Philip M. Hofer (Frumph)]

SNIP

> Please, spare me the “inflammatory” speech, and stop playing with
> words.  This here is a serious matter.

The theme is on github, make some adjustments.

http://github.com/ionfish/tarski

> This team here is driving people away.  In this case, it is driving
> away one of the jewels of the WordPress coding community.

Every developer should keep their code up to date with the current revision 
of wordpress, whether ionfish has time to deal with that or not,  is not up 
to us, it's up to him.

For example, the usage of the old style of creating widgets to the 2.8+ 
style of creating widgets.   The old style just plain really does not cut it 
anymore because the new class method implements functionality the old method 
doesnt.  That's how it is with more recent versions of WordPress and why 
code is deprecated.

If you worked for *any* company that kept standards and practices; that 
upheld the latest version of their corporate software you would most 
certainly have to update and revise your additions to adhere to that 
companies coding.

I feel for you for being beligerantly upset over the situation of it being 
not-accepted at this time, however from looking at his source it's about an 
hour worth of coding to put it up to specs; the end to which his users of 
the theme would benefit greatly.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Demetris Kikizas" <kikizas at gmail.com>
To: <theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 6:50 AM
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] What is wrong with you people? 
YourejectedTarski?


> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Edward Caissie
> <edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
>>
>> As Chip Bennett wrote: '... the term "reject". It is inaccurate and
>> needlessly inflammatory. We are not "rejecting" anything. We're simply
>> pointing out things that need to be fixed before "approving" something." 
>> ...
>> and this is exactly the case. We have several resolutions that can be 
>> used
>> and perhaps their wording carries an unwanted connotative meaning but
>> essentially the "not-accepted" resolution that everyone appears to be 
>> suck
>> on simply means the theme needs some sort of corrective measures to be 
>> taken
>> to meet the Theme Review criteria and be approved for the Theme 
>> repository.
>>
>
> Please, spare me the “inflammatory” speech, and stop playing with
> words.  This here is a serious matter.
>
> And the simple fact of it all is that the submission was turned down,
> Ben did not resubmit (he obviously has better things to do in his life
> than indulging the absurd[1] requirements of this team), he then went
> on to release the new version on the Tarski homepage, and WordPress
> Extend is still in version 2.6 from March 2010.
>
> If you don’t understand what all this means, let me make it clear for you:
>
> This team here is driving people away.  In this case, it is driving
> away one of the jewels of the WordPress coding community.
>
> [1] Here is a striking example of an absurd requirement:  That we must
> use body_class() and post_class() in our themes.  Could this demand be
> any more absurd?  It could not?  Wrong!  Just direct it to the author
> of Tarski, who wrote himself the core WordPress functions based on
> existing implementations in Sandbox and in his own Tarski. :-o
>
> Demetris
> http://op111.net/
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>