[theme-reviewers] New ticket

Thu Apr 21 17:03:04 UTC 2011

I think your boilerpate is awesome. I have one I use as well, but I may 
borrow from yours :)

My example was merely an example :) I am not sure to what extent to 
standardize, but I think it is important to offer some consistency 
across all reviews. Everyone will approach a little differently of 
course, but having some standard areas at minimum would be helpful, 
especially in cases where the theme is not approved and will be 
re-reviewed.

Dre

On 4/21/11 9:14 AM, Chip Bennett wrote:
> I do use my own standard boilerplate, but I wouldn't want to impose it 
> on anyone. Every reviewer is going to be most comfortable 
> communicating information in his or her own manner.
>
> What I think is critical is communication of these two key points:
>
> 1) Why the Theme failed the review (i.e. the *required* issues)
> 2) How to communicate with the reviewer
>
> For the first point, I simply list comments under the following headings:
>
>     '''Theme-Check Required''' (Note: we shouldn't have any more of these)
>
>     '''Required'''
>
>     '''Required, but can be fixed in next revision''' (Note: only if
>     nothing is listed under the '''Required''' heading)
>
>     '''Strongly Recommended, not Required'''
>
>
> Then, under the heading, '''Review Summary''', I add certain 
> boilerplate text, that I recommend as generally useful for any 
> reviewer, i.e.:
>
> For a complete review:
>
>     '''Review Summary'''
>
>     '''This is a complete review.''' Theme cannot be accepted until
>     items listed under '''Required''' are addressed. Once these issues
>     have been resolved, please re-submit your Theme using the uploader
>     tool on wordpress.org/extend/themes
>     <http://wordpress.org/extend/themes>, and a new Trac ticket will
>     be generated.
>
>     Note:
>      * Re-submitted Themes are given review priority over new Themes.
>      * Prior to re-submitting, please ensure Theme meets all
>     requirements in the [http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review Theme
>     Review Guidelines] and the
>     [http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Unit_Test Theme Unit Tests].
>
>
> For a cursory review:
>
>     '''Review Summary'''
>
>     '''This is a cursory review only.''' This Theme failed a
>     sufficient number of criteria to warrant discontinuing further
>     review. '''Prior to re-submitting, please ensure Theme meets all
>     requirements in the [http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review Theme
>     Review Guidelines] and the
>     [http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Unit_Test Theme Unit Tests].'''
>     Once these issues have been resolved, please re-submit your Theme
>     using the uploader tool on wordpress.org/extend/themes
>     <http://wordpress.org/extend/themes>, and a new Trac ticket will
>     be generated.
>
>     Note:
>      * Re-submitted Themes are given review priority over new Themes.
>      * Test your Theme using the [http://pross.org.uk/theme-check/
>     Theme Check tool], and ensure that no errors are found, prior to
>     re-submission.
>
>
> Finally, under the heading '''Responding To This Review''', I add 
> additional boilerplate text:
>
>     Theme developer questions, comments, and feedback are welcome and
>     encouraged. Please use one of the following methods:
>
>      1) Leave a comment on this ticket
>      2) Email the theme-reviewers email list
>      3) Use the #wordpress-themes channel on irc.freenode.net
>     <http://irc.freenode.net>
>
>
> I'm certainly open to any additional standardization that you think 
> would be useful?
>
> Chip
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Dre Armeda <feeds at armeda.com 
> <mailto:feeds at armeda.com>> wrote:
>
>     Chip, I think another area we may want to look at is how the
>     reviews are published to the theme submitter. What about
>     standardizing the information published in the review, and using a
>     single template that contains all of the relevant review points?
>
>     As an example:
>
>         * Intro statement (exp. Thanks for contributing. The theme is
>           awesome but there are areas you need to clean up)
>         * Theme Check Info
>               o Required Items
>               o Recommended Items
>               o Info Items
>         * Debogger Items
>         * Deprecated Calls Info
>         * Test Data Info
>         * Test Environment Info
>         * Quick Observations
>         * Recommendations
>         * Closing Statement
>
>
>     Let me know if I missed anything. The objective is to manage
>     expectations. Standardizing gives a uniform feel upon delivery of
>     the review information to the submitter, and also gives reviewers
>     a common approach which may improve the process and learning curve.
>
>     Just an idea. Continual process improvement will enable us as
>     reviewers to become more proficient :)
>
>     Cheers,
>     Dre Armeda
>
>
>
>     On 4/21/11 8:49 AM, Towfiq I. wrote:
>>
>>
>>     On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Chip Bennett
>>     <chip at chipbennett.net <mailto:chip at chipbennett.net>> wrote:
>>
>>         A good question.
>>
>>         When we only had 3-6 active reviewers, we would, purely out
>>         of necessity, perform cursory reviews. Unfortunately, that
>>         practice primarily led to the Theme developers addressing
>>         only the issues noted in the cursory review, and not ensuring
>>         that all of the Guidelines were met. Thus, we would end up
>>         seeing the same Theme, several times - and each time,
>>         reviewing the Theme would incur the overhead of a new review.
>>
>>         So, now that we have many reviewers, I would strongly
>>         recommend that every review be as thorough and complete as
>>         possible. Our goal would be to review a Theme only once (if
>>         perfect the first time) or twice (the second time, addressing
>>         all issues in the first review) before approval.
>>
>>         Also, doing so will help all of the new reviewers through the
>>         learning process of performing Theme reviews.
>>
>>         Chip
>>
>>
>>
>>     Totally Agree with Chip...
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Towfiq I.
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     theme-reviewers mailing list
>>     theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>     <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>>     http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     theme-reviewers mailing list
>     theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>     <mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>     http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110421/de521f22/attachment-0001.htm>