🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1337@accuvax.nwu.edu> travis@delta.eecs.nwu.edu (Travis Marlatte) writes:
>The discussion was kind of heading in the direction of using maintenance
>as a training vehicle for new engineers. I think most of us agree that
>this is wrong. Exposure only to maintenance is probably not the
>way to bring a new programmer up to speed for design.
I think a small bug or new piece of functionality is the best way to bring
somebody up to speed.  The new engineer MUST be guided by a
experienced engineer throughout this experience.  However, leaving somebody
in maintenence for a long time is probably a good way to kill morale and
enthusiasm.

>I do think that maintenance as a training vehicle is a waste of time. The
>trainee learns nothing except how stupid past developers were.
The key is to make the trainee *SEE* what bad design, habits, styles,
whatever do to a maintenance effort, and just what bad design etc. *IS*.
Of course if the trainee is modifying my stuff they get to see a great
implementation of a good design :-).

>Actually, maintenance is an important part of new design as well. I can't
>count how much time I've saved by striping a piece of code from a past
>product and using it in a new design. Gosh - reusable software.
Exactly, get them to explore the system and see what there is out
there for them to steel.

>A few comments on licensing: 
>[...] It merely transfers liability. [...]
>[...] It is only a stamp of approval from a publicly
>recognized body and it is for the benefit of the public.
It also gives you somebody to pin the blame on and to sue :-(.
Like an civil engineer (at least in Ontario) must stamp building plans,
and if it falls down they catch it (bad pun intended :-).
>
>Travis

Rob.
-- 
Robert A. Osborne                  ...uunet!mnetor!lsuc!isgtec!robert
(Nice sig Bruce mind if I steal it :-)    ...utzoo!lsuc!isgtec!robert
ISG Technologies Inc. 3030 Orlando Dr. Mississauga. Ont. Can. L4V 1S8