[theme-reviewers] Upgrading Masonry In Core

[Josh Pollock]

That makes sense.

On Saturday, November 23, 2013, Chip Bennett wrote:

> I doubt my word would carry any more weight.
>
> Instead, get the Theme developers who are actually *using* Masonry, who
> would be impacted by (i.e. benefit from) the change to comment in the
> ticket, confirming their desire and intent to use Masonry 3.
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> @chip, yep the issue is a outdated core bundled version of core, with a
> new version that is not backwards compatible.  As far as I can tell the
> only things that are broken by the upgrade in core by a Masonry 3 are the
> footer widgets in core bundled themes.
> Nacin, and I think Helen as well, consider that a show-stopper. If you
> disagree with them on this, could you please say so in the ticket? I know
> lead developer trumps theme review admin, but theme review team admin
> should carry more weight then random guys (ie me and Rohit.) Thanks.
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>
> And here's the rub: Theme developers have been wanting/trying to use the
> latest version of Masonry, and we have been requiring them to use the
> core-bundled version. (See previous mail-list discussions regarding
> Masonry.)
>
> I say: provide a reasonable timeframe, and make the change. The problem
> (apparently - I'm also not a jQuery person) is that WordPress core bundles
> an outdated version of Masonry. We shouldn't compound that issue by forcing
> it to remain in core. If a bridge script can be written, all the better.
> But it shouldn't be a showstopper for getting Masonry 3 into core.
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> Would anyone's theme experience a similar issue? Probably. Is that a valid
> objection to upgrading in core?
>
>
> Probably.
>
> Is what nacin suggested about writing a back-compat wrapper possible? I'm
> not a javascript guru and I have no idea what the changes in masonry are.
> But if an add-on of some type can be made to fix compatibility breaks, then
> it's more likely to get in.
>
> The short end of it is that if at all possible, core upgrades cannot break
> people's websites. If somebody is using Masonry 2 and upgrading core to
> Masonry 3 will break that site, then Masonry 3 just ain't gonna go in. But
> if a "masonry-fix" script can be added to prevent that breakage, well, that
> will go over much better.
>
> -Otto
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131123/4277ccea/attachment.html>