The goal going forward

The goals for the near future are:

  • Comparing the theme and plugin review processes to see how we can work towards a goal of making both processes very similar so that any improvements made to one will also profit the other.
  • Put a team together to tackle the theme previews as this is a major issue. Ask Matt to put resources towards this.
  • Automation is still a priority to catch common issues and giving us more confidence that themes cannot be shipped that give sites a white screen of death.
  • Define the minimum requirements that need to be manually reviewed for the themes to be hosted on w.org
    • Licensing
    • Security Issues
    • PHP Errors
    • Illegal
    • Dishonest
    • Morally offensive
    • Egregious issues that we haven’t listed
    • Accessibility Reviews will be done after the themes go live.
  • Agreeing to try out a way to get more feedback from users on different aspects of themes and using the extra data on the theme to rank them appropriately in the repository.

Comparison between the Theme and Plugin review process

  • As we are discussing how we can improve the Theme Review process it would be good to see how our process compares to the Plugin Review process. It would help both teams to align so that we could both profit from improvements made to either system. Both processes are always changing. Parts of the process today may change tomorrow. The plugin review team is working on making the plugin review process public so that others can contribute.
Review Process Themes Plugins
Submission zip file  zip file
Review management in trac (Public) in the WordPress admin area (Private)
Review updates  via trac via email
Reviewers Anyone with a w.org account select group of experienced reviewers (will change in the future but only experienced reviewers will communicate with the developers)
Number of reviewers varied between 10 – 30 active reviewers 5-6 reviewers
Experience level of reviewers variable highly experienced
Reviewer training regular  not needed
Order of reviews order of submission  order of complexity of the plugin
Volunteer time minimal sponsored time sufficient time sponsored
Approval A final review is done by an experienced reviewer before going live The review approves the theme and then the developer must commit the code to SVN
Theme Updates Via zip files via SVN
Theme update reviews only automated reviews no additional reviews
Feedback on the review process Anyone can give feedback and work to improve the review process The small group of reviewers make the decisions
Automated Testing checking for common issues simple testing for PHP errors
Requirements A single detailed document of all of the requirements. Multiple pages on the guidelines: The general guidelines, a reviewer’s checklist and a page explaining how to check for these items.

My learnings from this have been:

  • A small highly experienced team with the resources can sometimes been more effective than a larger team.
  • Having separate information for developers and reviewers may change the public perception of the number of requirements.
  • As the plugin and theme reviewers are looking for similar issues it may be better to work together to unify some of the documentation.

Agenda for 2017 April 18

The Theme Review Team holds a meeting weekly and we encourage all members to attend.

Channel: #themereview | Time: Tuesday at 17:00 UTC 17:00 UTC

Recap:

Topics:

This week we want to start defining specific items that we want to prioritise so that we can get back to Matt with an update since out last chat.

  • Prepare a post comparing the theme and plugin review process to see how we can work towards a goal of making both processes very similar so that any improvements made to one will also profit the other. Responsible: @grapplerulrich
  • Put a team together to tackle the theme previews as this is a major issue. Get Matt to put resources towards this.
  • Automation is still a priority to catch common issues and giving us more confidence that themes cannot be shipped that give sites a white screen of death.
  • Define the minimum requirements that need to be manually reviewed for the themes to be hosted on w.org. The basic items I could think of are checking for licencing, anything illegal, dishonest, or morally offensive.
  • Agreeing to try out a way to get more feedback from users on different aspects of themes and using the extra data on the theme to rank them appropriately in the repository.

Once we are agree on these items we can get back to Matt and discuss the next steps.

 

If you have any topics, then please reply to this post and include the topic, along with a brief description of what you would like to discuss.

Restructuring the Theme Review Team

At the meeting on Friday with Matt, it was suggested that we should have Team Reps who could make the final decision as a direct democracy does not really work well in our situation. A few reason for this is the number of people active in a team meeting and voting on the same issue in another place and time may give different results.

The suggested restructure of the theme review team would be:

Team Reps/Team Leads

  • These people would be people who are experienced with theme reviews and willing to give their time to leading the Theme Review Team forward.
  • Responsibilities would include
    • Leading the team forward
    • Listening to the team opinions and making a decision
    • Communicate with other Teams and Team Leads
    • Help moderators with their tasks

Moderators

  • These would be people who are experienced members of the theme review team who help out with different administrative tasks.
  • These tasks could involve:
    • Doing final reviews and setting themes live
    • Returning tickets to the queue that have been abandoned
    • Assigning Trainee Reviewers themes
    • Giving a second opinion in tickets
    • Maintaining the requirements documentation
    • Leading team meetings
    • Writing the agenda
    • Fixing issues with themes not going live
    • Removing themes from the repo
  • Depending on what administratives tasks are done access will be provided.
  • All current Key Reviewers and Trusted Reviewers will become moderators.

Reviewers

  • There is no real change here. They can assign themselves reviews.
  • Are able to lead and work on projects and bring ideas of ways to improve.

Trainee Reviewers

  • This is everyone else who can assign themselves a ticket via the assign ticket button.
  • Are able to lead and work on projects and bring ideas of ways to improve.

Chat with Matt about the future of theme repo

On Friday evening, @jcastaneda, @poena and I met with Matt to discuss the future of the theme repository on WordPress.org. @greenshady had to drop out last minute since Matt wanted to do a voice call and Justin was unable to due to his internet connection. We asked Jose to join so that we would not need to delay the call any longer.

Matt wanted to know more about the Theme Review team. We mentioned our plans with automation, problems with the previews, and how the portability of content affects users. We also mentioned that the common issues in themes are security, code errors and prefixing.
A suggestion that we got back was that we should check if themes could be prevented from being activated if there are PHP fatal errors, like it is done with plugins.

The reason for having the meeting now and not at the community summit is so that we can start working on improvements before the community summit.

Matt’s goal for the theme repository is to make it the main place for users to search and find themes.
Matt is interested in seeing how the repository reacts if we remove the manual review process and switch to a process where user feedback helps rank the themes.
Amazon was an example where search results are influenced by different meta data including reviews and how reviews affect users buying a product or not. On Wix you can search for nearly any term and a related theme is shown. That should be possible on WordPress.org too.

Another comparison was made between Google and Yahoo where Yahoo used to have a directory of links that were reviewed before being added to the list but Google indexes all links but shows the best at the top.

Allowing users to give feedback in different formats like adding tags or giving a tag a thumbs up or down if the tag was correct or not thus allowing bad themes to drop and good themes to rise. Users should be able to decide how much upsell is too much.
An example of this is how Google Maps asks users for feedback after visiting is place.

Matt asked us how the featured themes/homepage functioned and we explained that they were random themes that have been updated in the last two years. As this list of featured themes are not always the best we need to come up with ideas how to improve it.

As we are not sure if the process will function without manual reviews, we will start working on getting better user feedback on themes. Once we have a good infrastructure in place we can experiment with how the repository reacts with no manual reviews.

We discussed the process we would go about making decisions on changes to the theme repository and came to the consensus that a direct democracy is too fragile and representative democracy would be a better solution.

We were given a few tasks to complete and then get back to Matt with the results so that he can see where the resources are needed.

Tasks:

  • Matt has asked that we choose a few people who will represent the team and make the final decisions.
    The representatives are people who can be contacted to get feedback from and provide feedback to.
  • To create a list of blockers or resources that are needed to improve the theme repo.
  • Once we have a list to contact him so that he can assign the necessary resources.

A few things that we discussed as potential places where we can improve on.

  • SVN access
  • Multiple screenshots
  • Improved search to be able find a theme related to a certain topic for example “Thai Restaurant”.
  • Improved previews that display the theme at a basic level and allow theme authors to show their own theme demo.
  • Showing more information about the theme, like the readme and changelogs.
  • Allow a way for users to report bad themes, but also if a theme has a certain feature.
  • If we allow themes to have content then we should allow custom post types and taxonomies as they are better than pseudo custom post types.