[Rspec-devel] process for introducing bigger changes

aslak hellesoy aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com
Fri Jul 21 19:59:43 EDT 2006

On 7/21/06, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> Fellow rspecers,
> It has occured to me that a few things have made it into rspec of late
> that have not really gone through any sort of approval process. I
> realize that rspec is not yet 1.0, but I've been using it w/ clients
> and in my own personal pet projects for a while. To that end, I want
> it to be a bit more stable than it's been.
> On the other hand, rspec is very early in its evolution, and we want
> to encourage new ideas and experimentation.
> To balance the desire for stabilty and vitality (allowing for
> volitility), I'd like to propose that we get a bit more vigilant about
> putting big changes into branches (not in the trunk) and getting more
> feedback from usage before introducing them to the trunk. That should
> keep releases more stable, but still provide an easy path for
> experimentation.

agree. anything big needs to be discussed first. big things are likely
to be put on a branch.


> Thoughts?
> _______________________________________________
> Rspec-devel mailing list
> Rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel

More information about the Rspec-devel mailing list