[theme-reviewers] WPTRT = TSA?

[Chip Bennett]

Well fair enough, then... I withdraw my philosophical complaint. :)

Chip

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
> > Except that, by *what*, I really mean *if*: as in, is it a foregone
> > conclusion that Child Themes will be in the Repository?
>
> I'm more focusing on making it capable of doing it. Guidelines on what
> are kinda your problem. ;)
>
> But yes, child themes will be allowed eventually. The reasons have
> been technical, not philosophical.
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
> > Originally, Child Themes were intended to be *update-proof*, not "more
> > update-proof", than (stand-alone) Themes. They were intended as a way for
> > the *end user* to add Theme modifications that would be retained when the
> > Parent Theme was updated.
>
> Yeah, I thought that too, and said so last week. Matt corrected me,
> and said that that was not the intended purpose of child themes. The
> intended purpose was to allow themes to be extended, as they were
> doing lots of CSS-only type competitions at the time (with things like
> the Sandbox theme and so on), and child themes were intended to
> facilitate that.
>
> In Matt's words (or pretty close, I was not recording at the time):
> "if we had intended to make themes capable of retaining modifications
> through upgrades, we've have done it differently".
>
> So yes, child themes are not end-user-only from the .org's
> perspective, and will be allowed in the repo, eventually.
>
> -Otto
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110119/7c31608c/attachment.htm>