[theme-reviewers] Is it necessary to use Core Bundled Masonry?

Wed Sep 18 21:28:15 UTC 2013

+1, all rules have reasons...

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Jasper Kips <jasper at planetkips.nl> wrote:

> Actually you are behaving foolishly, and potentially dangerously. There
> can be a plethora of reasons why some WordPress uses the version of a
> component it uses. These include, in the case of javascript, stability,
> browser compatibility, compatibility with other javascripts, security. That
> is list is not complete. Going in, unloading javascripts, or other
> components from core, can, and most likely will, interfere with WordPress,
> and/or plugins.
>
> Just my 2 cents,
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jasper Kips
>
>
> Op 18 sep. 2013, om 23:21 heeft Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com> het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> This is a ridiculous requirement.
>
> So let's imagine a scenario where a reviewer noticed that my theme
> deregistered core-bundled Masonry 4 versions or so ago in order to use
> Masonry 3. That reviewer would have said "Josh you are required to use the
> version of Masonry that is bundled with WordPress." To which I would have
> said, "but you see, the version of Masonry in WordPress is very old. The
> very different new version, allows me to solve all of the weird formatting
> problems I was getting when using Masonry in my theme." And the reviewer
> would have reminded me that our guidelines do not have sensible flexibility
> built-in to allow for the rules to be bent a bit when it solves real world
> problems. Instead, I'd have been given the choice of removing a feature or
> allowing my theme to remain broken for an indefinite period of time.
>
> Wouldn't it have been better if the hypothetical reviewer had allowed this
> rule bending, in the name of making things work, that would have had little
> to no adverse consequences as long as I agreed to switch to core-bundled
> Masonry when it was updated to Masonry 3?
>
> See how that second scenario produces better themes, which I think is the
> point of the theme review guidelines to begin with.
>
> Of course, my theme works nicely with Masonry, because no one noticed that
> I acted sensibly instead instead of following the guidelines to the letter,
> which would have produced an inferior theme.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Rohit Tripathi <rohitink at live.com> wrote:
>
>> Great. I am submitting a trac ticket with patch.
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 15:10:37 -0500
>> From: dane at danemorganmedia.com
>>
>> To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Is it necessary to use Core Bundled
>> Masonry?
>>
>> Chip, do you have a good resource for me to start learning how to go
>> about doing that?
>>
>>  <postbox-contact.jpg>
>>  Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>  Wednesday, September 18, 2013 15:06
>> You should submit a Trac ticket (with patch, if possible) to have the
>> core-bundled version updated.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>  <postbox-contact.jpg>
>>  Towfiq I. <tislam100 at gmail.com>
>>  Wednesday, September 18, 2013 15:04
>> +1 for the making this allowed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Towfiq I.
>>  _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>  <postbox-contact.jpg>
>>  Rohit Tripathi <rohitink at live.com>
>>  Wednesday, September 18, 2013 15:01
>>  Here is the latest version:
>> http://masonry.desandro.com/masonry.pkgd.min.js
>> and here is the one which wordpress uses: http://pastebin.com/HtbGdtdK
>>
>> These are two really different scripts.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>   Rohit Tripathi <rohitink at live.com>
>>  Wednesday, September 18, 2013 14:58
>>  The core jquery-masonry(v2.1) is practically useless, it has 1/3rd the
>> amount of code present in the version 3.1.2. I will be handicapped, if I am
>> forced to use the MUCH older version, as I am not able to do what I want
>> with it.
>>
>> It's a request to allow usage of the latest version, as both are really
>> different.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>  <postbox-contact.jpg>
>>  Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me>
>>  Wednesday, September 18, 2013 14:54
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Yes it's requirement to use core bundled scripts.
>>
>> Emil
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20130919/5537222d/attachment-0001.html>