From: "T. Onoma" <transami@...>
Date: 2003-12-02T21:01:13+09:00
Subject: Fwd: Re: Ruby2 RCR (was Re: Constants, class variables and the cbase field)

Hi all, 

This is an important subject that came up on core. Please have a look and 
let's talk about what we can do to improve things.

  See: ruby-core:1847

Some response (from 1857):

1. Lets not mistake *suggestive ideas* for *proposals*. They are not
proposals. People make suggestions as a way to LEARN. Which is why many of
them are from newbies. This is often a misunderstood form of self-education,
very much like a scientific process (ref. http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~gaud/
bio372/class/behavior/sciproc.htm) People observe their own Ruby-related
problems and make suggestive hypothesis toward solutions, often times
directed right at Ruby itself. They present these in the mailing lists to
"put them to experiment". In doing so they learn. They learn how thier idea
may be is misconcieved, or how there are good alternatives to it, or how the
idea might be improved upon, and so on. And we all learn from this, not just
the submitter of the idea.. Then sometimes, a good idea is actually hit upon.
Thank goodnes they posted that suggestion! And the community response gives
the suggester sound footing to actually make a real proposal.   All of this
is a way to learn and explore Ruby. To feel apart of a vibrant language that
actually encouges its users to ask the questions, to make the sugestions, to
feel just a little bit "like matz". So please, do not mistake these things
for sins against the Ruby Way.  For they are not impinging demands to change
Ruby. They are but the "protoplast" for what may become so when they are made
"real" as an RCR on the Ruby Garden. Then and only then.

2. And so I am led to make a suggestion now: That we, as a community, might 
think about how to better this whole process. I for instance, was thinking of 
a wiki-ish web knowledgebase of well catagorized suggestions, good search 
functionality, perhaps automatic poles for "late stage" ideas (those being 
prepared for RCR), etc. Something that really moves ideas through a process
from early suggestion and exploration through a perculation, upward into final 
RCR. [ed model after Scientific Process] And with this, likewise, a much more 
exacting RCR process itself. (I believe David is working on the latter 
presently). The rationale behind this is of course to organize the seemingly 
chaotic way in which it is approached now, thus lowering repetition of 
same-old-same-old as all we have now is a poor mail-archive search; and at 
the same time improve the quality of the really good ideas that make it to 
the top. This would help matz, I think, quite a lot.  (But mind you, even if 
we gain #2, please do not forget #1!)

...

Obviously the current route is becoming a burden for our beloved matz.


T.