[theme-reviewers] Redux framework may be dialing home

Dovy Paukstys dovy at reduxframework.com
Thu Oct 16 20:39:48 UTC 2014

IE, would you work with us to ensure we have a version that completely
matches your WordPress.org needs?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Dovy Paukstys <dovy at reduxframework.com>

> Otto:
> I will add documentation on how to remove the tracking and supply a
> modified version in our builder then.
> If we forked TGM and created a version that complies with your above
> requirements would that be acceptable?
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Dovy Paukstys <dovy at reduxframework.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Since I seem to have broken it, I've uploaded a "static" version of the
>>> stats we typically display on Redux.
>>> http://reduxframework.com/staticstats/  That's what we do with the data
>>> we gather. As I said before developers can append their "hash" to get a
>>> drill-down view of this data.
>>> Otto:
>>> Thank you for chiming in.
>>> While I may agree partially with your statement about themes I fear
>>> developers do more than WordPress originally designed it to do. That goes
>>> beyond a design or a blog, and so you find more powerful themes.
>>> Our theme framework is in no-way a theme framework. It is only an option
>>> framework. We provide a powerful interface to the settings API and that's
>>> it. We don't provide templates or anything of the like.
>>> Truly Redux is to be run as a plugin, but I do believe TGM is not
>>> permitted in WordPress.org themes, am I correct? If that was changed, then
>>> there is a very easy solution! But I fear we won't get to that today.
>>> We justify because we do not hide. We're completely wide open and the
>>> users have full choice and untraceable to the specific user. That's all it
>>> boils down to. That and we are a plugin that developers choose to use in
>>> their theme.
>>> Theme Developers know about the tracking. We have docs on it. We answer
>>> any support issues, and we let people view the data. There is no hidden
>>> agenda here.
>>> So what do you suggest?
>> Dovy,
>> What I'm suggesting here is that, as it stands, I can't see us allowing
>> themes to use your framework because of this tracking thing.
>> For example, TGM is mostly disallowed, as you say. And don't get me
>> wrong, TGM is a nice bit of code. Very powerful, easy to use. But it does
>> things that we don't agree with. Specifically, it has the capability of
>> auto-installing code without user intervention. It can install plugins from
>> outside our repository. If a theme does any of these things with it, then
>> that's cause for rejection. Themes can't have plugins be required, use the
>> external_url or the force_activation features, etc.
>> These are all off by default, and so that's fine, but even so it's one
>> more thing that is required to be policed. And if the reviewers are fine
>> with doing that extra policing, fine. Given my choice, TGM would still be
>> disallowed because it contains this capability at all.
>> Now, if a theme did tracking of this nature, by itself, then it would be
>> rejected by the current standards, opt-in or not. So, since we're
>> evaluating only the theme, and the theme includes the framework, then
>> including this sort of tracking in themes is grounds for rejection. Which
>> basically means that no theme in our directory can use your framework
>> without removing that code. So, you can make your code do whatever you
>> like, but we're going to have to disallow it if it does certain things or
>> contains certain code.
>> So, up to you in that case, but I would very much suggest making a
>> version of the framework without the tracking at all, for use by developers
>> who want their themes to be listed on WordPress.org.
>> -Otto
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20141016/1b5fd054/attachment.html>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list