[theme-reviewers] Is it ok that a theme is just a re-write of an existing theme?

[Edward Caissie]

Hmmm ...

A few things right off ...

   - The description is preferred to be in English (i.e.: Theme description)
   - Recognizing the source "framework" is a good thing (it should be usable
   in the sense it is GPL-compatible licensed.)
   - There should be a very good reason the author is de-registering and
   then registering an external jQuery library.
   - The "textdomain" should be the same as or obviously similar to the
   theme-slug, this also goes for the "namespace" used for functions. <-
   strongly suggesting "not-approved" on this point

This is just from a quick look via the SVN ... keep looking the Theme over
as it is also a learning exercise when going through the training part of
becoming a "full" reviewer.


Cais.

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Cristopher Ocana <crissoca at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello guys,
> I'm working on my first ticket #3347 (I'm sorry if this is a newbie
> question) and the first two things i noticed are that this theme is a
> modification of a couple of existing themes, the first one is DIGWP's
> "Blank" theme which the author recognize it on the styles.css, but on
> the functions.php it uses a bunch of functions copied from "foliogrid"
> (a paid theme) without giving credit, which bring me to my question,
> is this valid to us?
>
> Hope some of you guys can help me out or point me to the right answer for
> this.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ------------
> Cristopher Ocaña . WordPress Junkie
> //// web development + design
> //// http://www.plan-zero.org
> //// cris at plan-zero.org
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110417/93f7e902/attachment-0001.htm>