[theme-reviewers] Obsolete Themes Discussion

[Edward Caissie]

PS: The whole idea behind this is I see no reason to suspend a theme simply
because it is old ... if there are security issues due to old code sure, but
simply being out-dated really is not a great reason. Just consider the
"senior" citizens of our world, they're old, should they be trundled off to
some place out of site, out of mind left to obscurity? I say NO! Some,
possibly many, are still very capable of providing valuable knowledge and
experience to the younger crowd.


Cais.


On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> @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 outdated functions or methods simply move it into the new Out of Date (OoD)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/20110725/8e7ef734/attachment-0001.htm>