[theme-reviewers] Questions on my first review

Emil Uzelac emil at uzelac.me
Wed Jun 12 03:38:56 UTC 2013 

Sayontan,

I really don't know why this was not approved and if this was me
personally, Theme would not fail because of that.

And to be honest (well why shouldn't I be) I asked pretty much the
same question just before my Ex-Theme was submitted to the repository
where this was clarified as OK. What changed in the mean time? Don't
really know.

We should indeed "judge" all Theme the same way :)

Emil







On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Sayontan Sinha <sayontan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Emil,
> Have you looked at the theme in question? Judging from your example I
> guess you haven't, so please take a look:
> http://themes.svn.wordpress.org/jaguza/1.0.2/functions.php. How is this
> materially different from what Responsive does? The way I (and any sensible
> person) would see the analytics feature here is that it is, to quote you,
> "empty, turned off by default". So why would this be "not-approved"? Bear
> in mind that this discussion is about the provision to insert analytics
> through a theme - not about someone's dodgy insertion of a tracking script.
> If all provisions to insert analytics  fall under plugin territory, then
> every theme that has such a feature should be forced to remove it during
> the next update. That includes your (ex-)theme Responsive, it includes my
> theme, and I am pretty sure it includes at least 100 other themes in the
> repository. I don't see any wiggle room for an exception here.
>
> My main intent was to drive towards some clarity around feeble guidelines
> such as "plugin territory" that are applied inconsistently across themes. I
> see no reason why one theme should be allowed to keep a feature just
> because people have been using it and/or it is turned off by default, while
> another theme doesn't get to keep it though it too has a similar feature
> turned off by default. Maybe the review team should stop pushing too hard
> on such cases. Or maybe it should judge all themes with the same yardstick.
>
> Sayontan.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>
>> Having something like this in footer.php or header.php is not right
>>
>>         <script>
>>
>>
>>             (function(b,o,i,l,e,r){b.GoogleAnalyticsObject=l;b[l]||(b[l]=
>>
>>             function(){(b[l].q=b[l].q||[]).push(arguments)});b[l].l=+new Date;
>>
>>             e=o.createElement(i);r=o.getElementsByTagName(i)[0];
>>
>>             e.src='//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js';
>>
>>             r.parentNode.insertBefore(e,r)}(window,document,'script','ga'));
>>
>>             ga('create','UA-XXXXX-X');ga('send','pageview');
>>
>>         </script>
>>
>>
>> Having this:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wait! There's nothing above? Precisely!
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Daniel <danielx386 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not to be rude about it, but I would like to quote Otto again:
>>>
>>>
>>> But Google Analytics, not so much. Realistically, the only thing you
>>>> need to do for GA is to put some code in the footer, and there's
>>>> dozens of plugins to do that right. I can't think of any realistic
>>>> integration for a theme that would make sense. GA doesn't display
>>>> anything at all, it records visits, basically. Not relevant to the
>>>> theme.
>>>>
>>>> The way I see it, anything that is in the theme should somehow relate
>>>> to the *display* of the webpage. That's sort of the whole point of the
>>>> theme. If the code doesn't affect the *look* of the page in some way,
>>>> then it shouldn't be in the theme
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or he wrong?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>> > @Sayontan what makes you say that?
>>> >
>>> > Google verification, GA, Social Icons are empty fields, turned off
>>> > by default, why would this be not-approved?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Sayontan Sinha <sayontan at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Plugin territory is a not-approve condition.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> So "Responsive" should get its Google verification, Google Analytics
>>> etc.
>>> >> removed, then, when there is an update? See
>>> >>
>>> http://themes.svn.wordpress.org/responsive/1.9.3.1/includes/theme-options.php.
>>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Plugin territory is a not-approve condition.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Harish <me at harishchouhan.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Hello Chip,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> There are many themes in the repo that have Google Analytics
>>> integration
>>> >>>> that could be activated from Theme Options.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Should a theme be rejected because it offers options for Google
>>> >>>> Analytics and Sharing or social buttons?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Regards,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Harish
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> From: theme-reviewers
>>> >>>> [mailto:theme-reviewers-bounces at lists.wordpress.org] On Behalf Of
>>> Chip
>>> >>>> Bennett
>>> >>>> Sent: Wed 12 June 13 04:13 AM
>>> >>>> To: [theme-reviewers]
>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Questions on my first review
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Google Analytics and sharing buttons are Plugin territory.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Peter Kakoma <kakomap at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Hi Abhik,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thanks for the feedback; point 1 has been duly resolved...another
>>> >>>> implementation I picked from the framework author. We do agree on
>>> point 1.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Point 2 though, as far as I know, isn't grounds to reject a theme.
>>> >>>> Plugin/non-plugin territory, to the best of my knowledge, has been
>>> debated
>>> >>>> ad nauseam and the jury is still out.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Abhik Biswas <abhik at itsabhik.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Pete,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> If I were reviewing your theme, I'd have rejected it straight away
>>> due
>>> >>>> to two major issues.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> 1. Images should be resized using 'add_image_size', no external
>>> resizer
>>> >>>> is allowed.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> 2. Those social sharing buttons and Google Analytics integration.
>>> In my
>>> >>>> opinion, they fall under plugin territory.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> But, it all depends on the reviewer.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Peter Kakoma <kakomap at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thanks Springer. I've added to the discussion
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:11 AM, J.J. Springer <
>>> jjgspringer at gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Peter,
>>> >>>> I have updated your ticket with some other things that I found
>>> while I
>>> >>>> was reviewing the theme. I hope that they are helpful. Your ReadMe
>>> does have
>>> >>>> the proper credits, so thank you for that. :)  I just wasn't sure
>>> what
>>> >>>> licenses were allowed.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Otto,
>>> >>>> Thanks for the speedy response! No worries about closing the
>>> ticket. I'm
>>> >>>> new to the process so any help is appreciated.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Amy,
>>> >>>> Thanks for the detailed answers. I just want to make sure that I do
>>> >>>> everything right!
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thanks again everyone for the help! Can't wait for the next one!
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> J.J.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Peter Kakoma <kakomap at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Hi Otto,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> The theme in question is mine; only issue it turns out after
>>> re-reading
>>> >>>> all the tips here is the base_64 encoding. I customized a  very
>>> popular and
>>> >>>> very user-friendly framework -the Slightly Modified Options
>>> Framework. Very
>>> >>>> big themes use it.
>>> >>>> That line, "100% safe - ignore theme check nag", which I know got
>>> you
>>> >>>> :-) was added by the Framework author. I took his word for
>>> it...seeing as
>>> >>>> the framework is used everywhere. I figured several themes in the
>>> repository
>>> >>>> already use it. I'm very aware of the base64 encoding rule;
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I've removed the option altogether; the encoding was being used to
>>> allow
>>> >>>> users import/export/transfer their settings. Will find another way
>>> of doing
>>> >>>> it...and will make changes to the framework repository so
>>> hopefully, the
>>> >>>> author can clean that up.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I've re-uploaded the theme:
>>> >>>> http://themes.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/12964.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Springer, if you can, please take a look at it again. (Seeing as
>>> you've
>>> >>>> already downloaded it and started the review :-) )
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> The credit link leads to my page: http:kakoma.ug, which I'm
>>> upgrading
>>> >>>> right now. I can put something else if the current 'under
>>> construction' page
>>> >>>> is an issue
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Oh, and the 'read me', as Springer can attest, contains proper
>>> credits
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:27 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:54 PM, J.J. Springer <
>>> jjgspringer at gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > 2. If I get any error of any sort, I assume that means that the
>>> theme
>>> >>>> > is
>>> >>>> > automatically rejected. As soon as I run into an error, do I stop
>>> and
>>> >>>> > mark
>>> >>>> > it rejected or keep going and try to find as many errors as
>>> possible?
>>> >>>> > Is
>>> >>>> > there a point at which I should just stop and send it back?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> This is up to you. Additionally, I apologize for usurping your
>>> review
>>> >>>> and failing the theme, but that kind of ticked me off a bit.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> If you wish to do a full review and give the theme author more tips
>>> >>>> and things that he needs to check on, that's perfectly acceptable.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > 3. The theme that I'm reviewing is a child theme of twentytwelve
>>> and
>>> >>>> > therefore doesn't have the "required" theme template files
>>> (missing
>>> >>>> > comments.php). Are child themes allowed? Is there some special way
>>> >>>> > that I'm
>>> >>>> > supposed to be reviewing them?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Child themes won't pass theme check, obviously, because of missing
>>> >>>> files and such. The review guidelines still stand though, and the
>>> >>>> child+parent must pass, as a whole, sort of thing. The parent is
>>> >>>> presumed to already have passed, since it's in the directory anyway.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > 4. The person that I'm reviewing used a lot framework stuff
>>> that's MIT
>>> >>>> > or
>>> >>>> > WTFPL licensed. Is that ok?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Both of those are GPL-Compat, so they're fine.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -Otto
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> >>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> >>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> www.urbanlegendkampala.com
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> 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
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> www.urbanlegendkampala.com
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> 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
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> www.urbanlegendkampala.com
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>> >>>> 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
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Sayontan Sinha
>>> >> http://mynethome.net | http://mynethome.net/blog
>>> >> --
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sayontan Sinha
> http://mynethome.net | http://mynethome.net/blog
> --
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130611/1c198404/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list