As far as I understand, what is CommonRuby and the process over CommonRuby
is not well defined yet.

For example original birxen's plan allows only implementers to propose a
new feature.
(Personally I'm neutral about this restriction though a standard must have
at least one major implementation over seeing W3C/RFC standards)

In addition saying "here is not correct place, make ticket there" is not
desired because
* it prevent creating a ticket by other than us
* it is troublesome for me to say it; I want to simply ignore rubbish
feature requests

Anyway before encouraging, define CommonRuby and its maintenance rule.



2013/4/12 Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list / marc-andre.ca>

>  Hi,
>
> Encouraging use of CommonRuby would do a lot to show that the
>> implementations are collaborating on the future of Ruby
>
>
> My thought is that all feature requests for trunk should be considered
> Common Ruby.
>
> I'm not sure I see the point of having two separate "projects". What would
> a "bug" in Common Ruby mean?
>
> it would
>> help us implementers filter out MRI-specific bugs/features from those
>> that will affect our implementations.
>
>
> Can't you filter on the subject of the message for "Feature"?
>
> If so, I would simply merge Common Ruby into trunk
>



-- 
NARUSE, Yui  <naruse / airemix.jp>