[theme-reviewers] Incorrect license on sites TOS

[Srikanth Koneru]

Not same topic, but are themes allowed to load css/js in entire admin
section or should they confine themselves to theme options page?


On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> I would, yes. I consider anything related to licensing, theme name, credit
> links, and upsell Themes to be show-stoppers.
>
> (Though, in this case, the issue is a minor technicality between Apache
> 2.0 compatibility with GPLv2 vs GPLv3. I would maybe note the issue, ask it
> to be fixed, and then proceed with the review.)
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Rohit Tripathi <rohitink at live.com> wrote:
>
>> I am reviewing a lite version of a theme which is built on bootstrap, as
>> we know bootstrap is based on apache 2.0 license, and compatible with GPL
>> v3. The Terms of service of the AuthorURI says that the theme is under the
>> GPL v2 license.
>>
>> So, should I ask the user to change the license detail on their TOS page,
>> before i begin the review?
>>
>> Another theme, for themes using Incorrect ThemeURI's, should i first ask
>> the author to fix the issue before reviewing the theme, or it can be
>> reported alltogether with other issues found in the theme?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20131031/acd26616/attachment.html>