From: "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" Date: 2012-12-14T01:23:04+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:50878] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7549] A Ruby Design Process Issue #7549 has been updated by trans (Thomas Sawyer). Personally, I believe the #1 factor for the better evolution or Ruby is for Ruby to be written in Ruby. Which basically means that Rubinius needs to become the primary implementation instead of MRI. Scoff if you will, but who would disagree that "eating your own dog food" is pretty vital to long term sustainability? I have also been a little concerned that development of Ruby is dominated by "C-think" b/c those who develop it are first and foremost C coders. To them Ruby is a secondary language --from what I can tell mostly used for systems admin scripting. If Ruby were written in Ruby, then actual Rubyists could participate in her development. They could actually implement some of the features they ask for rather then simply beg for them --and gems could handle much more in the way of extending the language. So if Matz rejects an idea, its not as bad b/c a 3rd party gem would be more likely to be able to offer the feature. I also think it would be somewhat eye-opening for current core developers. I think they'd gain a better perspective on Ruby itself, having to do almost everything in Ruby, which would bode even better for Ruby's future. ---------------------------------------- Feature #7549: A Ruby Design Process https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7549#change-34711 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/