release included themes

[ophian]

I really think this is something we should not wait for a stable milestone or forget it at all.

The core delivered themes should get a real overhaul and move a real lot of them away to additional_themes (all mt-* themes, all testing 2k11 themes, and some more). The sooner, the better!

Another question related is: What about the /default theme now?

Which ones should be included instead? (Mean live in Spartacus themes, but be available as current copy in release.)

I think this would make 2.0 a better 2.0!

[yellowled]

I'm all for removing outdated themes, especially all those 2k11-testing ones (aren't those actually a case of #42?)

I am, however, not too keen on including Spartacus themes here because frankly, most of them aren't much “better” than the old ones in the core. Maybe @onli's photo theme, although that's kind of a niche theme …

I am planning to do a few new, shiny ones (HTML5, mobile first, responsive etc.), in fact I even have concepts for two or three. What I don't currently have is the time to implement them. That is something that (on my end, at least) will have to wait.

[garvinhicking]

Hi!

Yeah, 2k11-* I just removed. Thanks for the heads-up.

My opinion on what to keep:

2k11 bulletproof blue carl_contest competition contest default-php default-rtl default-xml default idea kubrick wp

What to move to spartacus: moz-modern mt-clean mt-georgiablue mt-gettysbug mt-plainjane mt-rusty mt-trendy mt3-chalkboard mt3-gettysburg mt3-independence mt3-squash newspaper

I'd also prefer not to bundle existing spartacus templates, rather make people pick the templates they want from spartacus themselves...

On 03.11.14 10:12, Matthias Mees wrote:

I'm all for removing outdated themes, especially all those 2k11-testing ones (aren't those actually a case of #42 https://github.com/s9y/Serendipity/issues/42?)

I am, however, not too keen on including Spartacus themes here because frankly, most of them aren't much “better” than the old ones in the core. Maybe @onli https://github.com/onli's photo theme, although that's kind of a niche theme …

I am planning to do a few new, shiny ones (HTML5, mobile first, responsive etc.), in fact I even have concepts for two or three. What I don't currently have is the time to implement them. That is something that (on my end, at least) will have to wait.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/s9y/Serendipity/issues/225#issuecomment-61453156.

[yellowled]

blue idea kubrick wp

I'm not too sure about those, especially kubrick and wp. blue and idea really are not that different from some of the other themes you propose to be removed. kubrick and wp are ports of very outdated wp themes.

I think 2.0 would really benefit from having “original” themes bundled with the core. They don't have to be super fancy (we don't have the theme authors for that anyway), but they should be s9y themes, not wp ports.

[ophian]

Yes, please! :) Now!

Another thing is, there a themes named differently in info.txt and themes dir, as far as I remember. Directory carl_contest is named Serendipity v3.0, competition is named Coffee Cup, contest is named Blue Streak and default is named Serendipity v2.3 for example. This is confusing (and this not only for a newbie)!

And I also agree about supporting "original" themes only.

[garvinhicking]

My reasoning was that they provide layouts which are quite common to be used in a blog.

If we remove those, we would first need to create new ones providing such a look, IMO. At least a kubrick-style blog would be needed; wp was an example so that people could see how to use those hundreds of wp themes with a CSS. Granted, they are outdated, but then again, I don't see the hurt.

I don't think removing too many templates without providing a reasonable bouquet to choose layouts from doesn't benefit anyone and would be too pedantic.

If we had better stable themes, I'd be surely in favor of bundling them, but we don't ;)

On 03.11.14 10:29, Matthias Mees wrote:

blue
idea
kubrick
wp

I'm not too sure about those, especially kubrick and wp. blue and idea really are not that different from some of the other themes you propose to be removed. kubrick and wp are ports of very outdated wp themes.

I think 2.0 would really benefit from having “original” themes bundled with the core. They don't have to be super fancy (we don't have the theme authors for that anyway), but they should be s9y themes, not wp ports.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/s9y/Serendipity/issues/225#issuecomment-61454689.

[garvinhicking]

Yeah, but it stands and can't be really changed now without a lot of hurt and also confusion for people who adapted those old themes, and who would have then duplicate templates in their directory making it much more confusing than now.

It's a dumb choice of the past we can't really fix at this point, and is IMO not worth the hassle for older themes.

On 03.11.14 10:47, Ian wrote:

Yes, please! :) Now!

Another thing is, there a themes named differently in info.txt and themes dir, as far as I remember. Directory |carl_contest| is named |Serendipity v3.0|, |competiition| is named |Coffee Cup|, |contest| is named |Blue Streak| and |default| is named |Serendipity v2.3| for example. This is confusing (and this not only for a newbie)!

And I also agree about supporting "original" themes only.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/s9y/Serendipity/issues/225#issuecomment-61456177.

[ophian]

Themes are the eye to the world. Before anyone knows about using Spartacus or there is something like this at all, the one looks into themes. And a newbie looks at the dates too. You all and I know, an old date does not matter by default or tells about the inner quality. But the newbies first impression is a "false" ident, saying "hm, quite outdated"! A reason to improve this section massively! :pensive:

[yellowled]

Hey, if you guys want to kickstarter me writing nothing but new s9y themes for the next couple of months, I'm fine with that. ;-)

I really don't see the rush here. 2.0 is supposed to be a backend-focussed release. Once that's done, I'll be happy to go back to building frontend themes, especially if they don't have to be a default theme. But unless someone else steps up who has more time to create new, modern frontend themes, that will take time.

Then again, I don't see the point in dragging along themes in the core that really noone uses anyway.

[garvinhicking]

I don't think this was specifically adressed to you ;)

I'd like to drag along a couple of old themes (that people actually use, I'm surprised too) at least until we have a couple of new themes ready.

As a compromise we could simply remove the dates for those old themes? ;)

On 03.11.14 11:40, Matthias Mees wrote:

Hey, if you guys want to kickstarter me writing nothing but new s9y themes for the next couple of months, I'm fine with that. ;-)

I really don't see the rush here. 2.0 is supposed to be a backend-focussed release. Once that's done, I'll be happy to go back to buildung frontend themes, especially if they don't have to be a default theme. But unless someone else steps up who has more time to create new, modern frontend themes, that will take time.

Then again, I don't see the point in dragging along themes in the core that really noone uses anyway.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/s9y/Serendipity/issues/225#issuecomment-61461185.

[yellowled]

I'm not really passionate about this, so it's a “whatever” for me.

My “vision”, however, is a core that includes only 2k11, default, *maybe BP and a few newcomers. Just so you're warned properly ahead of time. :)

[ophian]

As a compromise we could simply remove the dates for those old themes? ;)

I see the smile and don't take that serious! ;-)

[ophian]

But before this get too long, shouldn't we just start with the suggested list by Garvin? Now?

[yellowled]

Yes.

[onli]

Thanks for bringing this up Ian.

I copied my workflow from the plugin move to do that now, had some minutes at hand. If you have some minutes, please test it :) Note that they are only in a new 2.0 branch for now for you to review it easily without interfering with our users.

[onli]

PS: In the future, we maybe should move them into a new deprecated section, to keep them around without promoting them. If we really arrive at having new shiny themes, which would be great.

[yellowled]

If we really arrive at having new shiny themes, which would be great.

The only “if” there is if I find the time, and that's more of a “when” than “if”. :)

[ophian]

If you have some minutes, please test it

What do you mean by this? And why should that all live in a 2.0 branch, even for review ..? I think you have also purged any history of these templates, doing this in two seperate commits. Could that be?

[onli]

What do you mean by this?

See if 2.0 is behaving like it should, the theme section.

And why should that all live in a 2.0 branch, even for review ..?

So we don't commit something to the master of spartacus that could impact users on 1.x directly without a second pair of eyes confirming the change.

I think you have also purged any history of these templates, doing this in two seperate commits. Could that be?

No, nothing is purged. I did not copy the history of these template files to additional_themes, since she still exists here and is pretty irrelevant. In fact, I was not aware that this is easily doable, but it seems like it is (http://gbayer.com/development/moving-files-from-one-git-repository-to-another-preserving-history/). Still, not necessary in my eyes.

[yellowled]

Does this still need testing? If not, can we close it?

[onli]

Think we should keep it as a reminder to merge the 2.0 branch with master when the RC is made. Otherwise it could be closed.

[yellowled]

Wouldn't it be more clear to have a dedicated “Things to do before releasing RC” issue and assign that to @garvinhicking …?

[yellowled]

Assigned to @garvinhicking so the reminder actually reminds. :)

[ophian]

We will need to keep in mind, that we purged template dirs and files in 2.0 now, which still live in master. I am not sure a git-merge will follow this that easily, or we may not forget about it, when we (how ever) push 2.0 into master.

[garvinhicking]

git-merge will basically completely kill "master" and drop-in replace it with "2.0". All should be good.

[yellowled]

git-merge will basically completely kill "master" and drop-in replace it with "2.0"

Erm, technically, no. :) It will try to combine all changes made to files in 2.0 into the same files in master. However, if a file/dir has been properly removed in 2.0 (using git rm <FILE>), the file should also be removed in master after the merge.

[yellowled]

I assume that we can finally close this, now that the RC has been released?