[theme-reviewers] Proposed WordPress 3.3 Theme Review Guidelines Revisions

[Chip Bennett]

Can you ask via in-post comment, so we can ensure all discussion takes
place there?

Thanks,

Chip

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Angelo Bertolli
<angelo.bertolli at gmail.com>wrote:

> As for:
> "Backward Compatibility
>
>    Themes are REQUIRED NOT to use function_exists() conditional
> wrappers for functions/functionality introduced more than one
> (RECOMMENDED) or two (OPTIONALLY) WordPress version prior
> "
>
> Is this to try to prevent theme developers from being backward
> compatible with all WP versions?  What is the purpose of that?
>
>
> On 11/10/2011 10:17 AM, Chip Bennett wrote:
> > Good morning, Theme developers and reviewers!
> >
> > Now is the time to begin discussing and finalizing the changes to the
> > Theme Review Guidelines pursuant to the release of WordPress 3.3. Please
> > read and discuss, here:
> >
> http://make.wordpress.org/themes/2011/11/10/wordpress-3-3-proposed-guidelines-revisions/
> >
> > Note that, until WordPress 3.3 is released, these proposed revisions are
> > a work-in-progress. Consider the above link as a "Request For Comment";
> > if you have anything to add, or disagree with anything proposed, please
> > comment accordingly. We post these, because we value your input and
> > feedback as Theme developers.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Chip
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20111110/5ebbbeec/attachment.htm>