[theme-reviewers] Theme Review Guidelines

[Ulrich Pogson]

@Chip I realise that it is not official, sorry I forgot to add that.

So there are no plans to make it a bit easier to view?

Who is on the Theme Review Team?

I understand that the guidelines need to be general. Perhaps an example: If
I remember correctly, themes are not allowed to redirect on activation.
This was discussed on the mailing list. I had a look for a mention in
the guidelines but could not find it. I may know about it but then someone
new is not going to know about this.


On 29 January 2014 15:41, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> The handbook version of the Guidelines are not official. The official
> Guidelines are the ones maintained by the Theme Review Team.
>
> As for things in the "Recommended" list being "Required" depending on the
> situation: that's true. But to try to write explicit Guidelines that cover
> all situations would result in really, really long and detailed Guidelines.
> As I often say: we want to avoid emulating the Code of Federal Regulations.
> :)
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Ulrich Pogson <grapplerulrich at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Are there any plans to improve and update the theme guidelines?
>>
>> It seems like someone from the docs team created a simplified version. I
>> find this a lot easier to browse.
>>
>> https://make.wordpress.org/docs/theme-developer-handbook/releasing-your-theme/theme-review-guidelines/
>>
>> The recommended page needs the most love as there are stuff there that
>> are required too depending on the situation.
>> http://make.wordpress.org/themes/guidelines/guidelines-recommended/
>>
>>
>> On 29 January 2014 14:02, Rohit Tripathi <rohitink at live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, that is True. Many Reviews, are based on mostly visual checks. Code
>>> is not checked at all.
>>>
>>> Looking forward to the February changes. Really hope that it resolves
>>> the problem, i talked about.
>>>
>>> :)
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 07:59:36 -0500
>>> From: chip at chipbennett.net
>>>
>>> To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Theme Review Guidelines
>>>
>>> The latter point will be addressed in the February program changes.
>>>
>>> But as a general note: any Theme that has a generated ticket has already
>>> passed the critical/required tests in Theme Check (otherwise, the Theme
>>> would fail the upload checks). From that point, Theme Check is only a tool
>>> for the reviewer, to help point out areas for further scrutiny. Dumping
>>> Theme Check output in review ticket comments is almost always redundant,
>>> confusing, and unnecessary.
>>>
>>> Based on most of the "approved" tickets I've been auditing, I suspect
>>> that several reviewers are reviewing Themes without ever looking at any of
>>> the Themes' code.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Rohit Tripathi <rohitink at live.com>wrote:
>>>
>>> Yup. I always try to keep up with the Review Guidelines. Also, the Theme
>>> Emphasis Points are a Great Help. I would recommened that to everyone, as
>>> they will resolve most issues for tickets which are re-opened.
>>>
>>> But, I see many new reviewers are picking up themes in bulk and just
>>> running Theme Checks, checking the license and approving theme. This is a
>>> bad practice, and seems to look like an attempt to misuse the Review
>>> Incentive Feature.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Rohit Tripathi
>>> Administrator
>>> InkHive.com
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 20:30:21 -0600
>>> From: emil at uzelac.me
>>> To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Theme Review Guidelines
>>>
>>>
>>> No problem thank you :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Jose Castaneda <jomcastaneda at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Emil.
>>> If anybody needs a second eye I try to make myself available when I can.
>>> I'm sure most others feel the same way.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20140129/854a922e/attachment-0001.html>