From: Magnus Holm Date: 2012-12-11T17:38:21+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:50750] Re: Towards a better process for changing Ruby Endoh-san, On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Yusuke Endoh wrote: > Hello Magnus, > > "Implemented" is not the final goal. It continues: > > 7. Previews and RCs are released. > 8. Someone reports a problem of some features. > 9. matz (or a release manager) may reconsider and decide to keep, > change or cancel the features. > 10. Official release. The spec is fixed! > >> 1. More time between a change is proposed and accepted (let's say, 7 days). > > I don't get your point. Usually, the time between "proposed" and "accepted" > is (too) long because matz does not reply so soon. > Did you mean "accepted and implemented"? It makes sense to me, but as I said > above, "implemented" is not "fixed." Oops, it seems I wasn't so clear. By "proposed" I meant that matz proposed the change (i.e. he made a decision). And I realize now that by "accepted" I rather mean "considered a part of Ruby, the language". I understand (and agree) that it's important to implement changes to see their full effect, but it's unclear when changes become an official part of the language. There's a lot of activity on ruby-core and redmine and it's difficult follow every thread/issue. I feel like some changes silently become official (without feedback from other implementers) because it was committed to MRI and "forgotten". So actually, the timeframe isn't so important I think. It's more important that we have one big list of "changes that matz want (and maybe already are in MRI), but hasn't been fully specified/tested". > Anyway, you want something like a public comment period, don't you? > Then, it is "now" for 2.0.0. > > I say again. Please try 2.0.0-preview and give us your feedback! > > We cannot promise to reflect all your feedback to the official release, but > we will be happy to consider. In fact, some feedback, e.g. #7300 and #7286, > triggered to revert some changes. > > Thanks, > > -- > Yusuke Endoh >