[theme-reviewers] Obsolete Themes Discussion

[Edward Caissie]

@Vicky -

Let's start by setting aside the code that would have to be written and just
discuss the ideals of moving versus suspending themes ...

In simple terms, at least the way I understand it, the current repository is
a heavily modded bbPress installation that has one forum and the process of
approving a theme into the repository either creates a new topic or
overwrites the existing one for every theme. Now, consider a second "forum"
for out-dated themes; and, rather than suspend a theme that uses old or
outdated functions or methods simply move it into the new Out of Date (OoD)
forum and use the same processes currently in use for current themes.

I would continue with *not* having the OoD themes be searchable from the
Administration Panels but only viewable from the dot-org listing as in add
another menu item under extend: Themes, OoD Themes, Plugins, Mobile.
Minimizing the search methods would help reduce the code impact, while still
making them readily available and findable.

Continuing even further down the road, on sort sort of schedule relevant to
the stable version releases the OoD themes are marked as available for
"adoption"; or in other words you can pick up that old theme, give it new
life, and re-submit it to the repository meeting current guidelines and
carry on updating it as your own. This currently is actually possible but
manually intensive. I would imagine there would be plenty of time to create
a more automated approach if the first parts are brought online.

Just some thoughts ...


Cais.


On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Vicky Arulsingam <
vicky.arulsingam at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm intrigued by this second repository idea - how would it work?
>
> As for cut-off, I agree for removing WP 2.8 themes from Extend but one
> question:
>
> Is there any way to inform users that they're using an obsolete theme?
>
> On 7/26/11, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
> > Just as an FYI, a WP 2.9 cutoff would put the cutoff on about Page
> > 37<http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/browse/updated/page/37/>,
> > resulting in the suspension of 58 of 95 pages of Themes; and a WP 2.8
> cutoff
> > would put the cutoff on about Page
> > 57<http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/browse/updated/page/57/>,
> > resulting in the suspension of 38 of 95 pages of Themes.
> >
> > Cais: any further thoughts on your "secondary repository" idea, that we
> > might be able to implement here?
> >
> > Chp
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I support this as well, but we need buy-in from higher up.
> >>
> >> I would propose WordPress 2.9 (December 18, 2009) is the *ideal* cutoff
> -
> >> or, barring that, WordPress 2.8 (June 11 2009), as the "generous"
> cutoff.
> >>
> >> I will raise the flag, if there is general consensus?
> >>
> >> Chip
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Amy Hendrix <sabreuse at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I noticed that this theme was last updated in 2008 -- it seems like,
> >>> as we're just now gearing up for the next release cycle, it might be a
> >>> good time to revisit enforcement of the "must be kept up-to-date"
> >>> guideline? I'd welcome autosuspension of themes that haven't been
> >>> updated in n core versions with a "please update" message to the dev
> >>> (where n is a somewhat generous number).
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at themeid.com> wrote:
> >>> > Yes and thank you. Theme has been suspended from the directory. They
> >>> > had
> >>> at
> >>> > least one more site which was suspended in the past.
> >>> >
> >>> > ----
> >>> > Emil Uzelac | ThemeID | T: 224-444-0006 | Twitter: @EmilUzelac | E:
> >>> > emil at themeid.com | http://themeid.com
> >>> > Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler. - Albert
> >>> Einstein
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, esmi at quirm dot net <
> esmi at quirm.net>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> <http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/3d-realty>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The link on the theme's Repo page and in the footer of the theme
> leads
> >>> to
> >>> >> an SEO site. No mention of the theme anywhere on the SEO site.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Mel P.
> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>> >> theme-reviewers mailing list
> >>> >> 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
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> theme-reviewers mailing list
> >>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> >>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> -----
> Vicky Arulsingam
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110725/e3770c5b/attachment.htm>