From: dblack@...
Date: 2006-10-26T22:49:38+09:00
Subject: Re: The Future of RCRrchive (was Re: 1.9 Backport?)

Hi --

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006, Bil Kleb wrote:

> Trans wrote:
>> Reading:
>>   http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2006/10/26/rubyconf-2006-recap/
>> 
>> Also, is it true RCRchive is to be no more?
>
> No.

In fact, I'm hard at work on the new RCRchive.  Stay tuned.  It's
going to operate somewhat differently, and will be focused on 1.9/2.0
changes.

> RCRchive is to be remade.  Most RCRs will be tossed
> because new RCRs are required to explain the *WHY*
> behind the proposed change and come replete with tests
> and sample implementations.  (Most current RCRs don't
> satisfy these criteria.)

Mind you, they're supposed to :-)  It's always been a requirement that
proposals include Abstract, Problem, Analysis, and Implementation --
lots of "why", etc.  Most RCRs are done conscientiously and
diligently, but some are not very complete.  Hopefully the new
logistics of the process will encourage more consistent compliance.


David

-- 
                   David A. Black | dblack@wobblini.net
Author of "Ruby for Rails"   [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3]
DABlog (DAB's Weblog)        [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc.   [4]
[1] http://www.manning.com/black | [3] http://www.rubypowerandlight.com
[2] http://dablog.rubypal.com    | [4] http://www.rubycentral.org