cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/51247328
I use speckit, and while I like the spec/clarify/plan/task/analyze/implement loop (although it can get a bit overwhelming at times), I don’t like that I have to start with writing a spec and implement it to begin with. I am looking for a more of a design phase before the spec phase, where I can talk about the overall application architecture, and then start writing specs for implementing pieces of it.
For instance, let’s say I want to build a github repo provisioner that 1. creates repos with desired setup, and 2. bulk edit repos with secret updates, yaml updates, etc. I don’t want to build both the features at the beginning. I want to first build only the create portion, and then do the bulk edit feature later on. With speckit, I can do this by only telling it to create the spec for the build portion, but later if I want to build the bulk edit portion, the whole application might need to be changed in important places, because it wasn’t a ‘planned’ feature when it was first designed. I want instead to have a design phase where I describe and maintain a doc with the whole application, and when I start the spec for the create portion, the agent can understand that this create portion is only part of a bigger application and can design/implement the create portion accordingly.
Have you come across a situation like this? how do you handle your big applications? Please advise.
I have been building a system, it’s hitting 2m lines of code soon (backend + frontend).
Currently, I have landed in a flow where I maintain a roadmap of releases. Each release is a featureset that I can test, verify, and demo. Most releases are planned through a PRD document which contains user stories, other constraints, and implementation phases. Then, I create as many ADRs and TDs as necessary.
Tbh, all these are for me to keep track of what I am building. I am having agents write the bulk of these documents by rumbling to a microphone for a good deal of time and then reviewing ruthlessly. You have much more control over small and steady increments.
When I feel adequetly prepared, I start coding, most of the time I will lay the foundation and then have agents fill in the implementations.
I don’t really worry about future proofing my architecture. It’s not like I have a massive database that will take multiple days to create an index, most of the changes are cheap.
Nothing of the above is new, they are well established tools mostly used by larger organizations, the only thing that changes with AI is the scale in which you can use them.
The above apply only fo projects I am serious with (2 projects atm), the rest I just ask AI to build what I need and send it the bugs until it works as expected.