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

[Emil Uzelac]

I am not sure what else to tell you :(

On Friday, September 26, 2014, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com> wrote:

> Emil, we are not going to bloat our code with backwards compatibility.
>
> We shouldn’t be forced by the TRT to have to go back, and reinvent our
> entire product to meet some absurd guideline.
>
> I appreciate the suggestion, but we’ve been trying to get this theme out
> for months and we’ve spent months debating solutions and there aren’t any.
> The most logical solution is to release the new version under its own name
> while still maintaining its branding.
>
> --Trent Lapinski
> =============
> CEO of CyberChimps Inc.
> http://CyberChimps.com
> Twitter @trentlapinski
> Skype: mobiletrent
>
> On Sep 26, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','emil at uzelac.me');>> wrote:
>
> Have you seen my link I posted above?
> http://www.studiopress.com/news/updating-genesis-2-0.htm
>
> Genesis did exactly the same thing and upgraded millions to HTML5, so it
> is possible and they did not use two completely different themes.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Trent Lapinski <trent at cyberchimps.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','trent at cyberchimps.com');>> wrote:
>
>> If a different version of a theme will break this many websites, it's
>> not the same theme. Point blank. Rename it and build the second brand
>> the same way that you build the first brand.
>>
>>
>> We upgraded the grid to be mobile first, and upgraded to HTML5 there’s no
>> way to go backwards.
>>
>> This is the nature of technology. The repo doesn’t allow us to not force
>> update notices, or allow users to easily revert back to previous versions
>> so naming convention is about the only thing we can do to protect the cycle
>> of innovation.
>>
>> We shouldn’t be forced to abandon our brand because of a draconian policy
>> that clearly stifles innovation.
>>
>> Let's be clear here: the word "Responsive" is incredibly valuable to
>> your business. It's not valuable to the admins of the theme
>> repository, and if they allow Responsive II to be added into the
>> repository, I will absolutely release a free theme titled Responsive
>> III or Responsive IV into the repository.
>>
>>
>> Once again the slippery slope fallacy. I’ve repeatedly stated that all I
>> am purposing is that established brands be able to use their brands for
>> multiple products. I am not stating we should allow people to use other
>> peoples brands.
>>
>> Your business has nothing to do with the repository, to be frank.
>>
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>> It's
>> your job to figure out how to work within the guidelines of the repo,
>> not the other way around.
>>
>>
>> I disagree. When the repo starts making business decisions on behalf my
>> company then I absolutely will challenge the guidelines.
>>
>> --Trent Lapinski
>> =============
>> CEO of CyberChimps Inc.
>> http://CyberChimps.com <http://cyberchimps.com/>
>> Mobile (714) 904-4280
>> Twitter @trentlapinski
>> Skype: mobiletrent
>>
>> On Sep 26, 2014, at 8:38 PM, Philip Arthur Moore <philip at pressbuild.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','philip at pressbuild.com');>> wrote:
>>
>> I just need someway to communicate that this is the new version of the
>> Responsive theme without breaking millions of websites.
>>
>>
>> If a different version of a theme will break this many websites, it's
>> not the same theme. Point blank. Rename it and build the second brand
>> the same way that you build the first brand.
>>
>> Let's be clear here: the word "Responsive" is incredibly valuable to
>> your business. It's not valuable to the admins of the theme
>> repository, and if they allow Responsive II to be added into the
>> repository, I will absolutely release a free theme titled Responsive
>> III or Responsive IV into the repository.
>>
>> Your business has nothing to do with the repository, to be frank. It's
>> your job to figure out how to work within the guidelines of the repo,
>> not the other way around.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20140926/d0455124/attachment.html>