>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Stowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
(Ivor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, previously:)
Ivor>> The open source cause is actually doing some harm here.
Ivor>> Software houses are in the business of making MONEY out of
Ivor>> writing code. Why should they use something that could
Ivor>> expose them to a legal minefield regarding copyright?
Jonathan> if they are sufficiently thinged up with sundry languages
Jonathan> and show an aptitude to learning new ones which have a
Jonathan> similar curve then thats fine with me
And that's why I think that companies should be more friendly to people
who hack perl, or any language, alongside a community on their own time.
The employee is doing something to _educate_ themselves, which companies
should be very actively seeking, and should have infrastructure to not
have to tell the same employee that they have to stop being part of the
community when they take the job. Or something.
Jonathan> I have taken to asking whether interviewees prefer vi or
Jonathan> emacs so I might not be the best witness here.
I was asked for my opinion on the same in my last interview, together
with reasoning. I got the job, and my interviewer later admitted that
he didn't care which I liked, (I use both for different things; right
now I'm writing this e-mail in xemacs/gnus, and editing this machine's
httpd.conf in vi) but asked in order to see how zealous/tolerant I am.
This was a good check, I guess, because this is an all Unix (and only
Unix) shop, and as such we have coders who are much more likely to be
strongly opinionated and flame you if you tell them what to do than
'normal' programmers. I like the idea of a personality test based on
zealotry-themed choices as interview questions. :-)
- Chris.
--
$a="printf.net"; Chris Ball | chris@void.$a | www.$a | finger: chris@$a
"In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."
