Constitution vs Plan - What are the recommendations for these?

[blade1981m]

This may be more spec-driven development than specifically spec-kit, but figured I'd ask here in case the spec-kit implementation comes into play at all.

I have watched several videos on spec-kit recently and it seems like the plan defines the how (which often includes the tech stack) and the constitution defines the non-negotiables (which also often includes tech requirements). I am still having a super-hard time correlating these two components.

In thinking through it a little deeper I am left feeling that the constitution is the non-negotiables for the entire project, whereas the plan is the how of the specific "feature" that your spec is for. Assuming that this is accurate that then leaves me with feeling like the first "feature" either needs to be a "bootstrap this project" with no real functionality or it literally becomes just the first feature with the assumption that the project has already been bootstrapped.

In searching for similar discussions I did come across one thread - #360 - where the idea of a project-level spec doc is created which then to me at least correlates the idea of the constitution being a project-level plan.

What are other people's thoughts on this? Am I off with my understanding of the concepts of each of the documents? Where should the tech-stack requirements for a new project go?

[jeremyeder]

Adoption of spec-kit ... shouldn't be too prescriptive about this. Each team will have their own opinion. Just coming to grips with SDD and TDD are a big enough leap.

Governance opinion that makes sense initially to me...:

• Company develops corporate policies
• VP/legal can override corporate
• Eng can override project
• Dev can override project (what are patterns that don't interfere on multi-developer projects?)