[theme-reviewers] Formal Request for Change of Methodology.

[Chip Bennett]

Theme developers cannot develop against a methodology.

If you think that complaints about subjectivity and consistency are bad
now, just imagine how they will be if a mere methodology replaces objective
guidelines.


On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
philip at frumph.net> wrote:

>   Methodology:  noun, plural meth·od·ol·o·gies.
>
> a set <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/set> or system of methods,
> principles, and rules for regulating a given discipline, as in the arts or
> sciences.
>
> emphasis on “a set or system of methods”
>
>
>
>  *From:* Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <philip at frumph.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 26, 2013 8:07 AM
> *To:* theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> *Subject:* Re: [theme-reviewers] Formal Request for Change of Methodology.
>
>   Remove all requirements and recommendations, change it all to 'best
> practices'
>
>
>
>  *From:* Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 26, 2013 8:05 AM
> *To:* [theme-reviewers] <theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [theme-reviewers] Formal Request for Change of Methodology.
>
>  That's a workflow, not actual Guidelines.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
> philip at frumph.net> wrote:
>
>>   It’s written below your reply in the message.
>>
>>
>>  *From:* Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 26, 2013 7:57 AM
>> *To:* [theme-reviewers] <theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>>  *Subject:* Re: [theme-reviewers] Formal Request for Change of
>> Methodology.
>>
>>   If you're going to propose a complete overhaul of the Theme Review
>> philosophy, that will require a complete rewrite of the Theme Review
>> Guidelines. Please proffer a replacement set of Guidelines - i.e. what
>> exact content you would have on the Theme Review Codex page. Then we can
>> compare, contrast, and discuss.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
>> philip at frumph.net> wrote:
>>
>>> 1) Remove all requirements and recommendations, change it all to 'best
>>> practices', do not remove anything in the codex just yet.
>>>
>>> 2) Theme review process.
>>> * Theme reviewers tag a theme for review. / It already passed the upload
>>> checker
>>> * Check theme with the other plugin(s)[1] available for development,
>>> check it for notices, warnings, fatals and deprecation messages, Pass/Fail
>>> * Check theme with theme unit test.  Pass/Fail
>>> * Review the tags, website links, theme name.  Pass/Fail
>>>
>>> It's done, it's reviewed, it's over, if it passed all of those, flag it
>>> as passing review and live.
>>>
>>> 3) Anything else missing on the above list that is a MUST should be
>>> added to the list but only if it's a MUST, and can't go live no exception.
>>>
>>> [1] Make the plugins work for the theme review team; add common security
>>> problems, etc.
>>>
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~**~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> This is it, this is all that is needed.     Everything else is icing on
>>> the cake for best practices.
>>>
>>>
>>> Themes are the 'meat and potatoes' of WordPress, the idea that a theme
>>> must adhere and be cross compatible with other themes in features is a
>>> nuance that is unnecessary to worry about.   Plugins are made to enhance
>>> themes; if a plugin doesn't work with a theme the community WILL contact
>>> the author; they always do.   As long as the theme is up to date with core
>>> coding which all of the tools at our disposal make you aware of - of which
>>> even the messages from core will also state things it is unnecessary to do
>>> anything otherwise.
>>>
>>> // not sure about
>>> Not sure what Nacin wrote in entirety on the Make site, but having the
>>> themes that are live and pass the upload process and immediately go live
>>> again would be a boon; that basically makes it like the theme developer has
>>> svn access, without having svn access.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.**wordpress.org<theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org>
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/**mailman/listinfo/theme-**reviewers<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
>
>  ------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130626/81267797/attachment.html>