Displaying 61 To 90 Of 211 Comments WordPress Has A Smaller Community Than Either Drupal Or Joomla Hi Kevinjohn, First, I’m always up for having someone playing Devil’s Advocate! :) But I should note: I’ve actually got another comment held in the moderation queue (too many reference links), in which I compare WordPress and Joomla, with respect to Community Gatherings, Community-Contributed Extensions, Official Support Forums, and Community-Contributed Documentation. I merely left off the StackExchange comparison, and posted a follow-up comment – which currently appears rather out of context. Second: the premise primarily entailed not the quality of the help provided by the community, but rather by the relative size of the community. The assertion that WordPress has a small community relative to Joomla or Drupal is prime facie absurd. The relative quality of help provided by each community is another question entirely, and one that I wasn’t really attempting to address. But, to that point: In my experience, finding out answers to simple WP questions is very quick; but rises at an exponential rate as you move from simple to moderate to advanced. In large part due to the input/output of it’s community. That’s actually what prompted me to mention StackExchange. The relative difficulty of a typical WPSE question is considerably more advanced/complex than the typical WPORG support forum question – and in my experience, the answers are commensurately advanced and thorough. (Although, I would also counter that the problem with the WPORG support forums isn’t the quality of answers, but rather the quality of the original questions; people simply fail to follow instructions – instructions designed to help them get the best-possible answers to their questions. That is, in part, why I believe that WPSE is uniquely designed to help get answers to the more difficult WordPress-related questions.) » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 26, 2011 @ 2:09 PM Oh, and I forgot to mention Stack Exchange: StackExchange is a great example of community-driven, developer-level support. WordPress Answers launched 7 months ago, and has 11K questions, 16K answers, and 7K users. Drupal Answers launched less than a month ago, and 4.6K questions, 6.6K answers, and 2.9K users. Joomla answers is currently at “failure to launch”, not having yet even reached the Beta phase. Advantage: WordPress » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 26, 2011 @ 12:36 PM And here’s someone else’s (equally lacking in cited references) opinion, stating that one of WordPress’ advantages is its “huge community”. For an attempt at relevant comparisons, let’s start with community gatherings. For purposes of brevity, I’ll ignore WordPress MeetUp gatherings, and just compare the number of Joomla Days events with the number of WordCamps. Joomla appears to have about 25 this year. WordPress appears to have about 55 this year. Advantage: WordPress Next, we’ll look at community-contributed extensions. Joomla appears to have just over 8,000 extensions (I cannot find a separate listing for themes/templates) contributed from its community. WordPress has over 16,000 Plugins, and almost 1,500 Themes contributed from its community. Advantage: WordPress Next, let’s consider the official support forums. Joomla’s official support forum has about 2.4MM posts, in 575,000 topics posted by over 500,000 people. WordPress’ official support forum has about 2.4MM posts, in 590,000 topics posted by over 2.7MM registered posters (according to Forum moderator Andrea R.). Advantage: WordPress, based on # of registered users, though this could fairly be considered a push overall. How about community-contributed documentation? We could compare community-contributed documentation, but I cannot find a good metric to compare Joomla’s documentation against WordPress’ documentation. Advantage: (undetermined) What else is relevant? » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 26, 2011 @ 12:13 PM Plugin Quality Not Plugin Quantity Should plugin reviewers be paid? If so, why not pay the theme reviewers? As a Theme reviewer: I say absolutely not. The WordPress project likely doesn’t have the funds, and WPF might have a difficult time justifying such an expense as a 501(c)3 organization. So: who ends up paying? The only viable source is Automattic, which would be an inherently bad idea, IMHO. Maybe theme and plugin submitters should pay a fee for reviews? Again: absolutely not. It is imperative that reviews remain fair and objective. Introduce financial incentives/contributions from Theme/Plugin developers, and that fair/objective standard becomes infinitely more difficult to maintain. Heck, the WPTRT has already had to defend itself against accusations of taking money for approvals, and/or for the Featured Themes listing; imagine if actual money was involved. » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 23, 2011 @ 12:29 PM WPWeekly Episode 111 – You’ve Been DevPressed Welcome back, WPWeekly! Glad to have you back, Jeff! » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 10, 2011 @ 2:15 PM Should Automatic Upgrades Be Opt-In? I second what Eric Mann said: Automatic core updates should be OPT-OUT for new WordPress installations, but OPT-IN for existing WordPRess installations. I’m all for the decisions, not options philosophy, but I’m also (and even more-so) all for the philosophy that, all else equal, new features in core should be disabled by default in existing installations, no matter how major or minor the feature. First, do no harm. And I would instantly enable the automatic core-update feature. What would be even cooler would be to have WP-CONFIG options to automatically update to RC and beta releases, or even to bleeding-edge nightlies. (Sure, I do this now, with Westi’s Beta Tester Plugin; but doing it via one line in WP-CONFIG would be even better.) And I agree with everyone regarding Plugins and Themes. » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 8, 2011 @ 7:41 PM What’s The Quickest Way To End A Conversation About WordPress? Another concept that, while certainly legitimate, can also be abused as a means to stop debate, is meritocracy. (The abuse of this concept often correlates to abuse of the bikeshed concept.) I believe that I have observed improvement in this regard, however. It is more likely today that non-traditional (i.e. non-code) contributions are considered more favorably with respect to one’s merit than such contributions would have been considered a year or two ago. Even still, I don’t think the contributions of, say, Ipstenu, ESMI, and Zoonini (et al) as WPORG Forum Moderators is valued as highly as it should be, with respect to meritocracy. So, there’s ample room for improvement, but I can honestly say that I’ve seen some improvement. » Posted By Chip Bennett On August 31, 2011 @ 12:28 PM I hate hearing, “So long, and thanks for all the fish!” from one of my favorite WordPress community sites. I’m looking forward to see how things progress from here, Jeff, and I hope to see you involved in the community as you find the time, energy, and motivation. » Posted By Chip Bennett On May 17, 2011 @ 10:40 PM Roots – WordPress Starter Theme I’m sorry, but I completely disagree that changing /wp-content/uploads/ to /assets/ in any way whatsoever makes code more “clean”. Why try to build in the overhead of the Options Framework Plugin, when you can merely implement the Settings API on your own? (I’d be happy to answer any related questions; I’ve been trying to learn the ins and outs of the Settings API, and would be happy to share.) What is “dirty” about ‘automatic-feed-links’? What do you mean by “dirty”? Don’t like it? Fork it.. Totally unnecessary, and I hate when this sentiment is used as a means to stifle debate. » Posted By Chip Bennett On April 8, 2011 @ 9:26 AM Okay, so, I admit to a lack of understanding of the necessity of a lot of what this Theme implements. It’s doing a lot of URL rewriting that serves absolutely no real purpose (changing I like the idea of rock-solid HTML5-based Themes, but this one seems to be less focused on solid WordPress-Theme things, and more focused on non-Theme things. » Posted By Chip Bennett On April 6, 2011 @ 11:48 AM Pet Peeve – Akismet Configuration Link Location I totally quoted the wrong section of that Codex page. Here’s the relevant text, that immediately follows what I quoted above: If the creation of a top-level menu is not necessary, decide under what top-level menu to place your sub-level menu item. As a point of reference, most plugins add sub-level menu items underneath existing WordPress top-level menus. For example, the Backup plugin adds a sub-level menu option to the Tools top-level menu. Please note with the taxonomy registration, WordPress automatically creates sub-level menus under the applicable top-level menu to manage those features. Use this guide of the WordPress top-level menus to determine the correct location for your sub-level menu item: Dashboard Note what it says about the Plugins menu, specifically: Plugins I don’t think Akismet has anything to do with “Plugin management”. » Posted By Chip Bennett On March 23, 2011 @ 8:48 AM From the Codex, regarding menu placement: It is rare that a plugin would require the creation of a top-level menu. If the plugin introduces an entirely new concept or feature to WordPress, and needs many screens to do it, then that plugin may warrant a new top-level menu. Adding a top-level menu should only be considered if you really need multiple, related screens to make WordPress do something it was not originally designed to accomplish. Examples of new top-level menus might include job management or conference management. I would prefer if Automattic would lead by example here – likewise with JetPack’s menu placement. » Posted By Chip Bennett On March 22, 2011 @ 10:48 PM Personally, I think it’s crap. It’s overly aggressive, and clearly intended to lead users away from the legitimate, free option: 1) The BIG, BLUE SIGN-UP BUTTONS for the paid options, contrasted with the tiny, normal-text sign-up link for the free option. No other non-Automattic Plugin developer would be allowed to host a Plugin in the Repository if it did anything remotely like this. Akismet is bundled with core – an egregious issue that should be rectified by the release of WordPress 3.2. » Posted By Chip Bennett On March 15, 2011 @ 10:42 PM Or, if a new, major release of WordPress is in beta for a full month, and then five release candidates are released over another two months, perhaps – just maybe – if you care about your shiny WordPress install, you might bother yourself to, you know, test the update in a development environment before updating your live, production site. Also: don’t blame WordPress when a Plugin breaks, or causes a WSOD, after updating WordPress. » Posted By Chip Bennett On March 8, 2011 @ 8:55 PM Have You Removed Or Disabled The Admin Bar? I hate the Admin Bar on the front end – but I’m giving it a trial run on the back end. Of course, I run it on the front end for Theme-testing purposes (just to ensure that Themes’ layout/design doesn’t get broken due to the Admin Bar). (Maybe you could add a poll question to account for using the Admin Bar on either the front or back end, but not both?) » Posted By Chip Bennett On March 4, 2011 @ 8:10 AM Narrowly Escaping WordPress 3.0.6 @Jeffro – well, more filtering than escaping, technically speaking. :) » Posted By Chip Bennett On February 9, 2011 @ 8:02 PM By the way, Jeff: “Narrowly Escaping“? Was that an intended pun, given the nature of the bug being fixed? ;) » Posted By Chip Bennett On February 9, 2011 @ 7:54 PM @Andrew Nacin - But why even have Akismet bundled in core.svn, even as an external? I’m really trying to understand the thinking. Is there some huge disadvantage to going this route? Does it make it more difficult to package up a default download file (i.e. wordpress.zip)? » Posted By Chip Bennett On February 9, 2011 @ 7:53 PM RE: bundled extensions – isn’t the issue not that Akismet and TwentyTen are bundled with the default download, but rather that they are bundled as part of the core.svn.wordpress.org repository? WordPress could come bundled with any number of arbitrary Plugins and/or Themes, and none of them would be over-written upon WordPress core update if none of those Plugins/Themes is part of the core repository. Whether bundled with the default download or not, Akismet, Hello Dolly, and TwentyTen (or any future iterations of the default Theme) need to be moved out of core.svn and moved into plugins.svn and/or themes.svn – voila: no more problems with the Akismet update dance, or overwriting modified TwentyTen (though I have little – nay, no – compassion for anyone who modifies TwentyTen directly, instead of using a Child Theme). » Posted By Chip Bennett On February 9, 2011 @ 7:41 PM WordPress To Be More Tumblr Like There is ZERO legal liability for WordPress’ Post-Formats implementation. Zero. » Posted By Chip Bennett On November 13, 2010 @ 9:57 PM Should Easter Eggs In WordPress Be Removed? Just a note: I voted “yes” because that is my preference. However, I know that my preference will never be implemented, and would equally and perfectly happy with an easy way to disable easter eggs. Also, I disagree with the argumentum ad microsofium on principle (it’s okay to trash Microsoft – except when we want to use them to justify our own behavior?), but even if using Microsoft as a justifiable argument in favor of easter eggs, the MS ones can only be accessed by user input that is so deliberately complex and arcane as to be utterly impossible to stumble upon. Also, if we’re going to emulate Microsoft, at least make the easter eggs mildly entertaining (e.g. displaying random quotes from the capital-P-dangit spoof website?), or useful (e.g. a list or other display of core contributors?). » Posted By Chip Bennett On October 28, 2010 @ 12:14 PM ThemeForest And The Theme Repository Interesting tie-in, Jeff. The Theme Review team are actually in the process – even today – of improving the WPORG Theme Repository uploader validation script. Everyone benefits from automating the process as much as possible! Also, regarding tools – several are available, and are linked from the Theme Review Codex page. The two most beneficial tools are both WordPress plugins: Debogger and Log Deprecated Notices. Next, of course, is the W3 HTML/CSS validators. The easiest to use is Unicorn, which combines HTML and CSS validation into a single tool. Also, the entire Theme Review Codex page is thoroughly cross-referenced to the Codex pages for the various required functions, tags, and hooks. Everything we’ve been able to think of is there – but of course, if Theme developers have more ideas for how we can better communicate the quality guidelines, or help educate how to implement the guideline requirements (and why various criteria are required vs. recommended vs. optional), we’re always open to such ideas! » Posted By Chip Bennett On September 24, 2010 @ 11:29 PM BuddyPress And bbPress Are Getting A Divorce @_ck_ That doesn’t really surprise you, does it? In my case, honestly, as long as they provide a smooth export/import of forum data, I’ll be happy. My forum isn’t huge right now – although it’s suffering from lack of maintenance. I’ve held off on any changes to the code, Theme, or anything else until the bbPress-as-plugin is released. (Why bother, at this point?) » Posted By Chip Bennett On August 18, 2010 @ 8:43 AM Cutline Dropped On WordPress.com In Favor Of Coraline @Gaz –Comments Posted By Chip Bennett
/wp-content/uploads/ to /assets/, /wp-content/plugins/ to /plugins/, static Theme resources from /wp-content/themes/css/ and /wp-content/themes/js/ to /css/ and /js/, etc.); it considers add_theme_support( 'automatic-feed-links' ) to be “dirty” and instead hard-codes feed links in header.php. It uses add_object_page() (huh?!?) instead of add_theme_page(), registers multiple settings rather than a single options-array DB entry, and appears to perform no validation/sanitization of Theme Settings on input or escaping of Theme Settings on output.
Information central for your site and include the Updates option for updating WordPress core, plugins, and themes.
Posts
Displays tools for writing posts (time oriented content).
Media
Uploading and managing your pictures, videos, and audio.
Links
Manage references to other blogs and sites of interest.
Pages
Displays tools for writing your static content called pages.
Comments
Controlling and regulation reader to responses to posts.
Appearance
Displays controls for manipulation of theme/style files, sidebars, etc.
Plugins
Displays controls dealing with plugin management, not configuration options for a plugin itself.
Users
Displays controls for user management.
Tools
Manage the export, import, and even backup of blog data.
Settings
Displays plugin options that only administrators should view (also see Creating Settings Pages).
Displays controls dealing with plugin management, not configuration options for a plugin itself.
2) Defaulting the ostensibly free option to a “donation” amount
3) The guilt-trip associated with a frown emoticon presented if the user – who has every right to do so – moves the slider to a $0 donation.
Why not put TwentyTen in themes.svn?
(I won’t even get into Hello Dolly… :) )
It wouldn’t make sense to have a non-GPL theme available on WordPress.com, given all that’s happened..
When would it ever have made sense?
Also:
David’s point is that Cutline was never more- or less-restrictive than it is currently, licensed under Creative Commons, since it has always been licensed under Creative Commons. Thus, it is a falsehood to claim that Cutline is now under a “more restrictive” license than it was when it was distributed to wp.com.
The only mention that Cutline was ever licensed under GPL comes from Matt himself. I’ve seen no corroboration of that claim. (Perhaps someone has a copy of the allegedly GPL-licensed version of Cutline? That would settle the matter, for sure.)
Further, if the version of Cutline hosted on wp.com was licensed under GPL when it was distributed to wp.com, then it remains GPL – regardless of the license of any subsequent version(s) of Cutline. So the claim that it is somehow “less free” than it was when it was first distributed to wp.com is just completely untrue.
» Posted By Chip Bennett On August 12, 2010 @ 4:44 PM
Thesis Goes Split Licensed – Hell Freezes Over
@Jon Brown -
@Chris Bennett – you make a point, and I I’ve rethought it some, but I was NOT trying to equate dependent with derivative. I agree they are different cases. I spoke to strongly to suggest calling a single function made always made a work derivative. Here’s the thing though, when you choose to make a function call of GPL code you agree to the terms of using that body of work, not just that function.
In a legal sense, that statement just isn’t true. There is absolutely nothing legally binding to the GPL anyone creating a WordPress Theme, because a Theme is not inherently derivative. The only thing that would cause a Theme developer to “agree to the terms of using [WordPress]” would be to incorporate actual, copyrightable WordPress core code into the Theme. Other than that instance, the developer is in no way bound or encumbered by WordPress’ GPL.
I’m not saying you couldn’t duplicate that function into your own code and claim fair use of it, just that calling it directly from a GPL body of work means you are agreeing to the terms of that whole work.
Simply put: no. The courts have been quite clear: mere linking does not render a work derivative. See Sega, Sony, and Galoob.
Further while I agree there is a difference between dependent and derivative, I still feel all themes are derivative, however some plug-ins could certainly claim to be dependent without being derivative however. A dependent work would be original from the start and could make a few calls to another work but not make wholesale use of the framework defined in the original GPL work.
Again, this interpretation is at odds with precedent case law. Function calls are “methods of operation” and the means of interoperability, which the courts have clearly established are non-copyrightable content.
A theme is fundamentally interwoven with wordpress code throughout…
No, a Theme exists of its own files. Even when a Theme is aggregated with WordPress core by being placed in the wp-content/themes directory by the end user (not by the developer – a key point), no physical interweaving of WordPress core and WordPress Theme files takes place. A Theme does not physically modify any core WordPress code, and vice versa.
…witness Drew Blas’ analysis of Thesis a theme which Pearson regularly claimed was 99% his original work.
What I’m talking about excludes the Thesis issue – about which I cannot speak with any certainty, since I’ve not seen Thesis’ source code. I’m only talking about Themes in general, under the assumption that core-code copy-pasting is not taking place.
Extending the discussion, a plugin that modified WP’s sidebar widgets for example I would argue is likely derivative, whereas something like pretty link or something that added 100% new functionality might only be dependent and not need to carry the GPL (even if it utilized some fundamental WP functions).
I would contend that merely extending WP_Widgets is not derivative. Modifying a default WordPress Widget would be derivative, because such modification would require incorporation of that Widget’s code into the Theme. But merely extending WP_Widgets to add an original, new Widget is not derivative. In this case, the Theme developer has merely followed the functional specification for adding Widgets.
» Posted By Chip Bennett On July 24, 2010 @ 10:35 PM
@Jon Brown -
I subscribe to the untested legal opinion that calling functions from GPL code (WP) makes a work derivative. I know plenty of people disagree with that, however I think that for a work not to be derivative (of WP) it needs to stand on it’s own. Stand on it’s own, as in it could run from the command line or along side Drupal or along side whatever. In other words the plug-in (or theme) would get an input, do it’s thing and then return an output without calling any functions from GPL code (WP).
That opinion is just simply not supported by extant copyright case law. There is no legal basis whatsoever for claiming that dependent equals derivative.
The legal standard for a derivative work is incorporation, in some concrete form, of copyrightable content of a protected work.
WordPress could sue Thesis for making WP function calls. Thesis could sue you for making Thesis function calls. In both cases, the use of function calls would be ruled non-copyrightable, and therefore non-infringing. And in both cases, even if we go with the legally unprecedented assumption that the use of function calls was copyrightable, in both cases the rules would unquestionably be ruled fair use, and therefore non-infringing.
So, I agree with your original statement regarding being ecstatic that Thesis has gone split-license GPL – but this turn of events doesn’t really impact the underlying question regarding Themes being inherently derivative of WordPress.
» Posted By Chip Bennett On July 24, 2010 @ 9:07 AM
@Jeffro –
That’s too bad. I was hoping he would go bankrupt so I could show him the door out of the community. Maybe then, he’d [care] about something other than himself.Why the vitriol, Jeff? Have you been harmed in some way by Chris, his DIY Themes business model, or Thesis?
Hypothetically speaking, would it even matter to you if, had the case gone to court, Chris would have won – that you’re actually hoping for the bankruptcy of someone who (aside from the clearly plagiarized copy pasta from WP core) was in no way infringing upon WordPress’ copyright?
Do you hold all other commercial Theme developers in such equally low regard? After all, every single one of them only switched to GPL or split-GPL after coercion from Matt – just like Chris.
This animosity greatly concerns me.
» Posted By Chip Bennett On July 23, 2010 @ 12:15 PM
Oh, and it would be awesome if we could figure out the identity of the imposter. Whoever he is, he deserves public ridicule and scorn.
» Posted By Chip Bennett On July 18, 2010 @ 8:18 AM
@Jeffro – thanks, Jeff!
(Let me guess: the IP address was from somewhere other than Montreal?)
@ the real Matt: I’m glad to know that the comment was indeed so beneath you, that it wasn’t even you that left it. :)
» Posted By Chip Bennett On July 18, 2010 @ 8:16 AM
«« Back To Stats Page@Brian Richards – to be honest, Brian, I did have the same thought. Matt’s details aren’t exactly secret.
» Posted By Chip Bennett On July 17, 2010 @ 11:52 AM