[theme-reviewers] Why can't theme authors have a second version of a theme?

Sat Sep 27 03:04:58 UTC 2014

I agree with Otto 100%.
the name is not acceptable.

-- David.
 On Sep 27, 2014 9:57 AM, "Emil Uzelac" <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:

> We have been "forced" into vote and so far two admins are against. Tammie,
> when time allows please add few words so that we can conclude this.
>
> Here is an example how Bruce handled the switch:
> https://themes.trac.wordpress.org/ticket/7656 note that he also stand
> behind a large user base.
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Zulfikar Nore <zulfikarnore at live.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Can we get a list of what would break listed in ticket please?
>>
>> Installed Responsive, downloaded Responsive II and renamed to Responsive
>> with version set to the latest version. Deleted the original Responsive
>> from the site and replaced with renamed one on viewing the site and admin
>> area the only "breaking" I can see is the new layout.
>>
>> Are we classing the loss of the old Responsive layout as "breaking"
>> sites?
>>
>> Zulf
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> From: trent at cyberchimps.com
>> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 19:43:52 -0700
>> To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Why can't theme authors have a second
>> version of a theme?
>>
>>
>> Cais,
>>
>> Slippery slope argument does not apply here. I am not asking to use
>> someone else’s theme name. I am asking to use my own name.
>>
>> Again, I see no logical reason why a theme author cannot release multiple
>> themes under the same brand.
>>
>> If the issue is using a number or Roman numerals, then can I use a letter
>> or letters instead?
>>
>> "Responsive HD" for example?
>>
>> If you admins are going to enforce ridiculous rules like this, then you
>> need to provide us with a solution that doesn’t result in breaking millions
>> of peoples websites, or forcing me to release the next version of my
>> product under a brand name no one will be able to identify.
>>
>> Someone here needs to purpose an actual solution that is acceptable.
>> Otherwise we’re just going in circles here.
>>
>> I just need someway to communicate that this is the new version of the
>> Responsive theme without breaking millions of websites.
>>
>> My team and I have debated this, and there is no easy solution. We could
>> build a plugin to change the update API and switch it to Github, we could
>> do a number of things to try and provide backwards compatibility, but all
>> of those “solutions” are compromises that will bloat our code, and force us
>> to release an inferior product.
>>
>> --Trent Lapinski
>> =============
>> CEO of CyberChimps Inc.
>> http://CyberChimps.com
>> Twitter @trentlapinski
>> Skype: mobiletrent
>>
>> On Sep 26, 2014, at 7:30 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> TL;DR: The idea of a version number in the theme name as not acceptable
>> is a valid point.
>>
>> Do we really need to write a new guideline (or re-write the existing) to
>> make this more clear. I can go do that right now if necessary but I think
>> some common sense should be applied in much the same way that the plugin
>> repository does not allow for it. Granted the two repositories have their
>> differences but there is no reason not to follow common sense and shared
>> ideals.
>>
>> I can appreciate your concern about potentially breaking some (all?)
>> sites if this theme was released as an update to its predecessor but simply
>> put if it is that vastly different and there is no backward compatibility
>> then it really is a new theme and should have its own name. Let its code;
>> its layout; and, its poetry stand on its own merits.
>>
>> I'm not looking to carry this argument on wether or not the theme name is
>> valid ... in this case I do not consider it to be acceptable.
>>
>> We're not stopping you from using your "brand" ... by all means feel free
>> to release a theme named Responsive II wherever you would like. We're just
>> saying it's not an acceptable name in the WordPress Theme repository.
>> Nothing against CyberChimps, its actually something that I would like to
>> view as a benefit for your "brand" as well as other theme author's "brand"
>> names. We should not be allowing most anything similarly named to another
>> theme when used, as in this specific example, with the Responsive name
>> foremost. We're not telling you no specifically. We're telling everyone,
>> "No one can submit a theme named Responsive II", because quite simply if we
>> allow you to submit Responsive II we would be setting a precedent to allow
>> someone else to submit Responsive III ... and that would be a different
>> rabbit hole again.
>>
>> Edward Caissie
>> aka Cais.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Daniel,
>>
>> Why don’t the admins “let it go” and let me name my own products with my
>> own brands. :-p
>>
>> --Trent Lapinski
>> =============
>> CEO of CyberChimps Inc.
>> http://CyberChimps.com <http://cyberchimps.com/>
>> Twitter @trentlapinski
>> Skype: mobiletrent
>>
>> On Sep 26, 2014, at 7:12 PM, Daniel Fenn <danielx386 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> After watching this fight I felt like telling trent to listen to the
>> song "let it go" from the movie frozen :)
>>
>> *Sits back and watches*
>>
>> On 9/27/14, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
>>
>> probably the last time where TRT is turned into (politely said) brothel!
>>
>> On Friday, September 26, 2014, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
>> philip at frumph.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Just going to giggle at this., and not cause any waves about it.
>>
>> *From:* Otto <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','otto at ottodestruct.com');>
>> *Sent:* Friday, September 26, 2014 5:54 PM
>> *To:* Discussion list for WordPress theme reviewers.
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org');>
>> *Subject:* Re: [theme-reviewers] Why can't theme authors have a second
>> version of a theme?
>>
>>  On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','trent at cyberchimps.com');>> wrote:
>>
>> The TRT has been over ruled by the WordPress Foundation, Matt himself,
>> and has been greatly influenced by Automattic and Audrey Capitol.
>>
>>
>> Trent, let's be a bit more civil than that. The Foundation, Matt, and
>> those at Automattic have not done any such thing.
>>
>> If Emil and the other admins want to change the rules, then nobody's
>> going
>> to stop them. I personally think it's a bad idea, and I'll say so, but
>> I'm
>> not going to use any form of veto power for something that is ultimately
>> so
>> silly.
>>
>> When I want the rules to be changed, then I have to email those admins
>> and
>> convince them. Done it before.
>>
>> The only time I've ever been really adamant about anything with regards
>> to
>> the review guidelines was on the security aspects. No using eval and
>> base64
>> and such. Things like that. Those are pretty obvious and sell themselves,
>> really. Those security things are the *only* thing I've ever pushed into
>> the guidelines (via theme-check) unilaterally.
>>
>> My point was that talking to Emil and the other admins about it, in
>> ticket, is far from pointless. They do have the power to give you an
>> exception. They do have the power to change the guidelines. They do have
>> the power to ignore any or all of the guidelines based on their best
>> judgment. That's why they're the admins. I'm not going to stop them, nor
>> is
>> the Foundation, or Automattic. As for Matt, he likely doesn't have an
>> opinion on the matter either way and would probably have no issue with
>> it.
>>
>> There is no need to be quite so extremely confrontational like this every
>> time you run into a minor disagreement. You don't need to convince me,
>> but
>> you probably could convince them.
>>
>> -Otto
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org');>
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Daniel Fenn
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20140927/d4a5491f/attachment-0001.html>