Issue #7549 has been updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda).


matz wrote:
>  I am against rigid rules that could easily bring us bureaucracy.  I am
>  also against introducing "class" to the community member.  All
>  community members (but me) have equal right.  Some might be more
>  trustworthy from their past works, but as of right, they should be
>  equal.

Agreed.

I believe what we need is not a rigid process, but dialogues and discussions.

For example, Refinements will be limited and marked as experimental in 2.0, which is the result of discussions with Charles and some other guys.  If you state a reason properly, you can change Ruby without such a rigid process.

It might be good to have a place dedicated to such discussions.  It could be a new project of Redmine.  However, only Matz should have veto power, because Ruby is his language.
My most serious worry is that Matz wouldn't be able to make his proposals of new features accepted by council members.
He said "code is documentation, where even bugs are described" before.  In this context, "code" means an implementation, not test code.  He often commits changes without tests:(

Speaking of documentation, I doubt it works well without an implementation.
I've written the spec of Refinements at https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-trunk/wiki/RefinementsSpec, but there is no feedback about the documentation, except the one from Matz about typo.

I believe implementations, documentation, and tests should be developed complementarily with dialogues and discussions, and finally Matz should make decisions.

----------------------------------------
Feature #7549: A Ruby Design Process
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7549#change-34680

Author: brixen (Brian Ford)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 


Matz,

At RubyConf 2012, I gave a talk about a design process for Ruby (http://www.confreaks.com/videos/1278-rubyconf2012-toward-a-design-for-ruby). So far, over 12,000 people have viewed that talk. I think it is reasonable to say that many people are concerned about and interested in a design process for Ruby.

On Monday, we had an IRC meeting of Ruby implementers. Most of the points in my proposal were discussed but I'm concerned that a lot of confusion remains.

I have written a post that describes a Ruby design process and hopefully clarifies points that people found confusing:

http://brixen.io/2012/12/11/a-ruby-design-process

I would like to propose this process for making changes to Ruby. I am going to put a summary of the process at http://rubyspec.org/design and ask for people who support the process to submit their signature. I'd like to request that you consider the response from the community for my proposal.

Thank you,
Brian



-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/