"A.R. (Tom) Peters" wrote:
> Suppose we want recertification, there will be 2 underlying reasons;
> what will be our policy?
>
> 1) People (like MD's) need to recertify every X years to show they still
> have the skills. IMHO the LPIC and employer should decide by themselves
> if the LPIC has kept up and needs recertification or not
>
> 2) When the exams evolve, our old certificates become less relevant. But
> maybe we don't upgrade our exams for ages. I guess we should give
> certificates a validity for X major revisions of the exams.
>
> Which brings up the question, how and when do we upgrade the exams and
> what do we do with the old ones?
I think we should develop the exams to correspond to a particular
kernel level, and let the market determine when a person needs to
be recertified. If, in the future, we have a certification
proclaiming that individuals who obtain it are capable of knowing
all the in's and out's of kernel 6.4.x, then how valuable will our
2.2.x certification be (it probably won't even be that far off)?
Companies will probably want to have people who are 6.4.x certified
if they are using the 6.4.x kernel, but if they are still using
2.2.x, then they may not care as much if the individual is 6.4.x
certified. They may actually be more interrested in finding someone
with 2.2.x certification. Since even numbered kernels are "stable"
releases, I would think that even numbers would be appropriate.
I don't think recertification in a specific kernel would be needed
under such a system. The problem would take care of itself as
the market required individuals to be proficient in the newer
kernels.
I would like to propose a kernel designation for the certifications,
and let the market determine what level is needed.
Example: LPIC 2.2, LPIC 2.4, etc.
Forrest
________________________________________________________________________
This message was sent by the linux-cert-program mailing list. To unsubscribe:
echo unsubscribe | mail -s '' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
