[theme-reviewers] Webmaster Tools IDs - plugin territory?

Mon Jul 15 21:57:12 UTC 2013

Hi Emil,

Now that is the perfect list. I hope admins, and whoever are in charge adopt
this list. This will this end this discussion.

Also when anything extra such as SEO options, custom post types are used, we
can make it mandatory that the theme developer properly documents it
somewhere so it's easier to use along with a mandatory warning about what
would happen if theme is changed.

Regards,

Harish Chouhan

Visit me at -  <http://www.harishchouhan.com/> www.harishchouhan.com 

From: theme-reviewers [mailto:theme-reviewers-bounces at lists.wordpress.org]
On Behalf Of Emil Uzelac
Sent: Tue 16 July 13 03:14 AM
To: Discussion list for WordPress theme reviewers.
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Webmaster Tools IDs - plugin territory?

I would not base this on another Theme and yes it does seem unfair

for new Themes. The only items that should be required are:

*         Removing or modifying non-presentational core hooks

*         Disabling the admin toolbar

*         Resource compression/caching

robots.txt can be stopped via uploaded, so that part does not need

to be in. 

And we can recommend the rest:

*         Analytics scripts

*         SEO options (meta tags, page title, post titles, robots.txt, etc.)

*         Content Sharing buttons/links

*         Custom post-content shortcodes

*         Custom Post Types

*         Custom Taxonomies

Good, not, what do you think? 

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Harish <me at harishchouhan.com
<mailto:me at harishchouhan.com> > wrote:

This sounds good for existing themes. However it would then seem unfair for
new themes as old themes would have more features and the new once would
feel of less value. 

Instead, let us consider based on say popular themes such as Responsive,
etc. and whatever features they have, make them acceptable for all new
themes and lets just end that. 

Regards,

Harish 

From: theme-reviewers [mailto:theme-reviewers-bounces at lists.wordpress.org
<mailto:theme-reviewers-bounces at lists.wordpress.org> ] On Behalf Of Emil
Uzelac
Sent: Tue 16 July 13 02:41 AM

To: Discussion list for WordPress theme reviewers.
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Webmaster Tools IDs - plugin territory?

Would it be acceptable if this guideline
<http://make.wordpress.org/themes/guidelines/guidelines-plugin-territory/>
does not apply to the Themes that are already in repository?

Plugin Territory Guidelines are required for new Themes, and recommended for
existing Themes.

If there are no security issues, conflict with the core etc.

Am I asking too much, what do you think?

P.S. Also only few of us are discussing this, are the rest not interested,
affected, what's up?

Emil 

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph)
<philip at frumph.net <mailto:philip at frumph.net> > wrote:

Excuse me, Mr. Bennett.   As part of the 'community'; there have been
discussions for and against, yet YOU working OUT of the team made the
determination as a requirement.    You completely ignored the make WordPress
themes conversation when it was first discussed and decided ON YOUR OWN.
In an email with other's they were still under the impression that it was
'recommended' still up until several weeks ago when it came back into topic
of conversation.

While it would be beneficial for you to believe you are in a team, your
actions have stated otherwise.   From the very beginning to now.

From: Chip Bennett <mailto:chip at chipbennett.net>  

Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 8:27 AM

To: Discussion list for WordPress theme reviewers.
<mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>  

Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Webmaster Tools IDs - plugin territory?

For the record: the Theme Review Admins work as a team. There is no
"leader". It has always been that way, and will continue to be that way,
unless and until we are told otherwise. 

The community rep is just that: a liaison to communicate with the rest of
the WordPress community. The community rep doesn't have to be one of the
Admins (and I think it would be great if a non-admin would want to take up
that role sometime).

What we are engaging in at the moment is a *discussion*. As part of that
discussion, Emil and I are expressing our opinions. It is not required that
all Admins hold to the same opinion (nor would such be a benefit). 

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph)
<philip at frumph.net <mailto:philip at frumph.net> > wrote:

End users have lived with it so far, there haven't been any major complaints
or suggestions on the forums to say the contrary.   I believe you are over
emphasizing the severity.

There are people including myself that do not agree with this and you
personally are not listening to the community.  Which makes things difficult
because you apparently have no one to answer to.   Last I checked Emil was
lead at the moment and you are not.   When the community itself or members
thereof do not like the results that are happening there needs to be someone
that can be talked with that can mediate the situation and make a
determination.

It would behoove you to not be as adamant as you are.   Consider a
compromise then, most of our 'concerns' with the myself and others who have
had themes on the repo for a predominate amount of time would not like to
see our end users have the headache that it will cause to add an additional
plugin.   Hostings like 1and1 and some others are very limited with their
memory usage; so consider making it so that all NEW themes as a requirement
to not include said plugin territory options and things in priority 1 should
be a bit more lenient in reviewing updates.

I am already maxed out in tech support as it is where I do not have time nor
the inclination to sit here and worry about 20,000+ people who are going to
be emailing me or adding post after post on the forums concerning a new
update which destroys their site.    Currently I already point them to the
github instead of the repo.   I am positive that the repo was there for
theme's to be able to be stored and able to be a helpful tool for the end
user and not a hindrance.

From: Chip Bennett <mailto:chip at chipbennett.net>  

Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 5:12 AM

To: Discussion list for WordPress theme reviewers.
<mailto:theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>  

Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Webmaster Tools IDs - plugin territory?

Those when switching to one theme or another will have some things no longer
work - and that is fine.  There are plenty of ways, avenues and programming
that you can take to include those features into the theme you switch to.

I disagree with "and that is fine." Most end users aren't developers, and
won't have the skills or desire to take advantage of the "plenty of ways,
avenues and programming" to add missing functionality to their new Theme.

The single most important party in this consideration is not the Theme
developer, or the Theme reviewers, but rather the Theme's end users. 

The BIGGEST idea about that the don't-worry-about-it group's main objective
is to make the theme review process easier and faster to get through.   The
biggest thing that people get hung up on returning day after day to review
themes is how time consuming they are to go through.   We also believe that
it's not the theme review team's responsibility to control that aspect of
allowing a theme to have a feature or not, that is up to the core dev's to
make that determination.

The core team has made it the Theme Review Team's responsibility. 

And I disagree that what you're suggesting would make Theme reviews easier.
Why would a Theme review be easier if the Theme can include any manner of
arbitrary functionality? Allowing functionality that goes beyond
presentation of user content just means that much more code that a reviewer
has to review, understand, and test. 

Use all of the plugins, theme unit test and requirements for the backlinks
and other things.   Do the cursory views of everything that's important and
move em through the review process. 

That's not sufficient for the end user. Code needs to be secure. Included
functionality needs to work properly.I contend that those considerations
*are* important to end users. Thus, everything that a Theme indicates that
it does needs to be tested during the review process.

The single most important party in this consideration is not the Theme
developer, or the Theme reviewers, but rather the Theme's end users.

  _____  

_______________________________________________
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
<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
<mailto: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/20130716/e590a396/attachment-0001.html>