Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
I think *all* job postings and offers should be forked to another list. This should be mod_perl only! Per Einar Ellefsen wrote: At 11:46 22.06.2002, Ged Haywood wrote: Hi all, On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Zac Morris wrote: Old fashioned is right, Can we decide whether this kind of post is or is not welcome on the List? My 0.02 is that if someone has decided on the terms of reference for an offer of employment which he is making then if it's legal, that's the way it has to be and we don't need to discuss it here - especially not at such length. I agree with you Ged; Job announcements are ok, any discussion is way OT.
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Hi, What is the right way of authorizing users under Mason? Should it be done as PerlAccessHandler or coded in handler.pl? --- # require myhandler.pl Location /registered PerlAccessHandler Apache::MyAccessHandler PerlHandler HTML::Mason /Location --- Vlad
Re: Knowing your limitation - was Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
My point is still the same, and you both concede that the problem is ultimately your lack of management ability. The point I was trying to illustrate was that it's really not OK for you to just say, Yup, that's my limitation, so be it. In every way conceivable, that's wrong in that it goes against necessary Due Diligence in fulfilling your mission/vision, not to mention the negligence to your stock holders/investors... You wouldn't hire a PM who said, I don't know how to manage critical path, so I'm just going to need lots and lots of bodies and money to get this project done. What you're both saying equates to the same thing. I accept your points that there are going to be barriers to just picking any body to fill a position, but during the interview process you should establish skills, abilities, compatibility, and affordability. Whether that person ultimately sits in the cube next to you or in a home office on the other side of the planet shouldn't be one of the factors in deciding whom you'll hire IF they have the skills, abilities, compatibility, and you can afford them to get the job done. Any other consideration is just putting an arbitrary quota on the type of people you'll have in your organization. When we look back 20 years ago many things were considered ok to hire based upon (sex, race, sexual orientation, etc), and it won't be too long before location will be considered just as pejorative, and those organizations that see that trend NOW and train their managers and teams to work virtually are the organizations that are going to be successful tomorrow. This is all ESPECIALLY critical to small companies in the current market. Why would any one choose a small company (who might not be around tomorrow) as a provider *OR* client/employer, when they can have a giant who's at least got the best chance to be around? I'll tell you why, because those small companies that can show they can do something better, more efficient, more *NIMBLE* and *ADAPTABLE* those are going to be the companies that people are willing to take risks on. Now this might all seem a bit off topic to some for this list but I think it's very relevant. I say that because in supporting something like mod_perl, or even just PERL in general, we are all the type of people that say: Yes, we realize this is not the hottest buzz word technology, and Yes, we realize that *arbitrary* standards like MCSE and J2EE say that Perl doesn't have a place, but I think we all know that's just crap. We program in Perl because it is the absolute best suited solution to a huge variety of problems. But, as these people have wonderfully illustrated we live in a world of perceptions, expectations, and assumption that often have little or nothing to do with doing what's best. The only way that these non-buzz technologies are going to stay around, stay staffed, and stay viable is if we as developers have a market, and I think the days were we get hired by company A and work until retirement are long gone. This means we ALL need to learn to be adaptable, pragmatic, and focused on standard ways of getting jobs done, and challenge every old world philosophy that holds that back. -Zac - Original Message - From: Gunther Birznieks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Mornini [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Zac Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 11:36 PM Subject: Re: Knowing your limitation - was Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted I agree with Tom but for different reasons. I would almost never accept a telecommuter I didn't know and that may even be if he or she came recommended. Everyone has different personalities and cultures and it takes time to really get to know how to effectively communicate with someone because everyone has different vocabulary even coming from the same country. And vice versa. Every person is an individual and it's really tough to find out the individual way someone needs to be managed over long distances. Face to face communication is the quickest most efficient way to learn how best to communicate (and hence manage) with most people and vice versa. eg You need to learn to read between the lines of how someone writes. One person's friendly sarcasm may be another person's insult. Without figuring these things out in person first, frictions can result at worst and usually at best, there will be inefficiency in communication (o, THAT'S what you meant...). We have accepted some of our employees telecommuting from the other side of the world but our best success has come from people who have been in our office physically for 3 months at minimum and then go back to where they came from to work. But people who we don't know their work habits... that is much more difficult to manage. For someone who wants to telecommute from the other side of the world, bringing them here for 3 months and housing them and then topping it up with long distance bills
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Hi all, On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Zac Morris wrote: Old fashioned is right, Can we decide whether this kind of post is or is not welcome on the List? My 0.02 is that if someone has decided on the terms of reference for an offer of employment which he is making then if it's legal, that's the way it has to be and we don't need to discuss it here - especially not at such length. 73, Ged.
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
At 11:46 22.06.2002, Ged Haywood wrote: Hi all, On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Zac Morris wrote: Old fashioned is right, Can we decide whether this kind of post is or is not welcome on the List? My 0.02 is that if someone has decided on the terms of reference for an offer of employment which he is making then if it's legal, that's the way it has to be and we don't need to discuss it here - especially not at such length. I agree with you Ged; Job announcements are ok, any discussion is way OT. -- Per Einar Ellefsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Old fashioned is right, Can we decide whether this kind of post is or is not welcome on the List? Hang on Ged, I'm thinking that there might be a community opportunity to develop a library of tools that will solve the obvious problem here. Would it be possible to provide a solution for visionless, stuck in the 80's management practices with mod_perl? If the answer to this question is yes then we can view this thread as a requirements doc. S
OT Job discussion, was Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
On Saturday, June 22, 2002, at 02:46 AM, Ged Haywood wrote: On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Zac Morris wrote: Old fashioned is right, Can we decide whether this kind of post is or is not welcome on the List? For what it's worth, my inclusion of the list address on my reply was entirely accidental. When I saw my reply come back on the list, I was very surprised. I apologize for making such a silly mistake. I agree that posting my response to the list was severely off topic and completely inappropriate. -- -- Tom Mornini -- InfoMania Printing and Prepress -- -- ICQ: 113526784, AOL, Yahoo, MSN and Jabber: tmornini
[JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
We're 1 year into development of a system that is OO Perl, mod_perl, DBI and DBD::Oracle on Linux. We've spent a lot of energy doing it right and writing tests as we go. This has given us huge benefits in the life of the project, but our current whitebox tester has decided to move to Washington, D.C. so we need somebody to fill his large shoes. If you're a good Perl programmer who has a strong sense of "the way it should be" and can be simultaneously mean, nasty, angry, distrustful and unforgiving to Perl code and the opposite to people then we'd like to talk to you. This person doesn't do new development, per se, but he is responsible for making things better via testing, fixing, documentation and refactoring. This is a full time job at an office in the South Park area of San Francisco, California, USA. Telecommuters are NOT what we have in mind. Call us old fashioned that way. :-) Pay and benefits are good, though it's no longer 1998. :-) Best benefit is working with a small group of people that are highly motivated by doing it right. -- -- Tom Mornini -- eWingz Systems, Inc. -- -- ICQ: 113526784, AOL, Yahoo, MSN and Jabber: tmornini
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
On 20/6/02 at 20:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Mornini) wrote: We're 1 year into development of a system that is OO Perl, mod_perl, DBI and DBD::Oracle on Linux. We've spent a lot of energy doing it right and writing tests as we go. This has given us huge benefits in the life of the project, but our current whitebox tester has decided to move to Washington, D.C. so we need somebody to fill his large shoes. If you're a good Perl programmer who has a strong sense of the way it should be and can be simultaneously mean, nasty, angry, distrustful and [snip] Sorry if I haven't kept up with this thread but, is this really the way the mod_perl list is going to go? Any clarification appreciated :-) Regards, Phil.
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Phil Dobbin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry if I haven't kept up with this thread but, is this really the way the mod_perl list is going to go? I hope so. All these job postings are making me feel warm and fuzzy for the future. -- Dave Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hire http://www.davehodgkinson.com Editor-in-chief, The Highway Starhttp://www.thehighwaystar.com Interim Technical Director, Web Architecture Consultant for hire
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Phil Dobbin wrote: On 20/6/02 at 20:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Mornini) wrote: If you're a good Perl programmer who has a strong sense of the way it should be and can be simultaneously mean, nasty, angry, distrustful and [...] Sorry if I haven't kept up with this thread but, is this really the way the mod_perl list is going to go? Any clarification appreciated :-) Yes Phil, this is how it was since the beginning (1996) and the majority seems to be happy about this trend. If you want more info please read the archives, where this thread has been discussed to death many times. For those who are still confused here is a short summary: OK: - *mod_perl* job offers posts - *mod_perl* job seekers posts both using the [JOB] or similar tag, so those uninterested can skip it. See: http://perl.apache.org/release/maillist/email-etiquette.html#Tags NOT OK: - non-mod_perl offers/seekers posts - companies looking for projects posts - posts from the OK group without proper subject tags Though if you are a company providing a commercial *mod_perl* support, do submit the relevant URL for inclusion at this page: http://perl.apache.org/release/help/commercial.html Hope this explains all the confusions and keeps everybody happy. __ Stas BekmanJAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide --- http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Old fashioned is right, and disregarding "telecommuters" is also extreemly short sighted and ultimaty limits your ability to providethe mostquality solution... I work for Cisco Systems in our RTP (NC) office. I work with two different groups, one based in San Jose and the other based in Ontario, as a "virtual team member" (what we call our telecommuter positions). I only bring all this up because I'm in exactly the role you've outlined here, and to be honest I don't think I would BE as successful as I am if I were located directly with either of these teams. The need to have everyone "all together" is usually indicative of a larger problem in team dynamics, and communications. It usually represents a team in which "charasmatic" leadership is more important than technical know how or ability to get a job done. Now don't get me wrong, for a person to BE a successful "virtual team member" they have to have great communication skills, and be open to working with others in multiple formats to enable the best level of teamwork and participation. With all this said, and based on my own personal experience in this role, I can tell you that what you're asking for here is a person to walk a VERY shape edge between the need to bring the best and brightest from people, without making it seem "personal". Actually having this role as an "outsider" to the day to day politics and interpersonal sabatoge of most bay area offices (yeah I lived there five years during the "boom") , gives a layer of abstraction that makes the job easier to perform. When someone is questioning things like style, or code effeciencyit comes across MUCH easier (more acadimic)when that person is a "talking head", an IM box,or a voice on the telephone. It becomes less "personalized" and easier to "pick and choose" the best componants into a greater whole. It also isolates the individual who may end up doing a lot of refactoring to present the final solution. Just something to consider. Open youself to the best people in the world and don't accept just the best you can find in your area, and you'll find that you solutions aren't also as limited... -Zac Morris - Original Message ----- From: Tom Mornini To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:30 PM Subject: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted We're 1 year into development of a system that is OO Perl, mod_perl,DBI and DBD::Oracle on Linux.We've spent a lot of energy doing it right and writing tests as we go.This has given us huge benefits in the life of the project, but our currentwhitebox tester has decided to move to Washington, D.C. so we needsomebody to fill his large shoes.If you're a good Perl programmer who has a strong sense of "the way itshould be" and can be simultaneously mean, nasty, angry, distrustful andunforgiving to Perl code and the opposite to people then we'd like totalk to you.This person doesn't do new development, per se, but he is responsiblefor making things better via testing, fixing, documentation and refactoring.This is a full time job at an office in the South Park area of San Francisco,California, USA. Telecommuters are NOT what we have in mind. Call usold fashioned that way. :-)Pay and benefits are good, though it's no longer 1998. :-) Best benefitis working with a small group of people that are highly motivated bydoing it right.-- -- Tom Mornini-- eWingz Systems, Inc. ICQ: 113526784, AOL, Yahoo, MSN and Jabber: tmornini
Knowing your limitation - was Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
Thanks for your response, Zac. Our tech team is very small. I'm the manager of the group, and my management style would best be described as lackadaisical. :-) So, you're right, this requirement is based upon management weakness. I knew that when I posted the job offer. In fact, I even told that to the employee who was leaving for Washington D.C. as the reason why I couldn't keep him on. He understood completely, having worked with me. :-) While I agree that it would be ideal to simply pick the best person for the job, this obviously isn't completely realistic. For instance, we have a certain pay range that we can afford, and that will artificially limit who we can consider. Other people won't even know we have an opening. Others still might have a language or communications barrier that makes it impossible for us to work with them. Notice that this is not actually his deficiency, but ours. If we could just speak (insert language here). I just don't see adding one additional limitation to that by wanting someone to come to the office as all that big a deal. Many people prefer it, and in this economy, help is not scarce and people are willing to go the extra mile. After all, it's not about getting the best person, it's about getting the best work done. If I know that I can't effectively remote manage somebody so it would be silly for me to attempt this in vain. On Friday, June 21, 2002, at 08:30 AM, Zac Morris wrote: Old fashioned is right, and disregarding "telecommuters" is also extreemly short sighted and ultimaty limits your ability to provide the most quality solution... I work for Cisco Systems in our RTP (NC) office. I work with two different groups, one based in San Jose and the other based in Ontario, as a "virtual team member" (what we call our telecommuter positions). I only bring all this up because I'm in exactly the role you've outlined here, and to be honest I don't think I would BE as successful as I am if I were located directly with either of these teams. The need to have everyone "all together" is usually indicative of a larger problem in team dynamics, and communications. It usually represents a team in which "charasmatic" leadership is more important than technical know how or ability to get a job done. Now don't get me wrong, for a person to BE a successful "virtual team member" they have to have great communication skills, and be open to working with others in multiple formats to enable the best level of teamwork and participation. With all this said, and based on my own personal experience in this role, I can tell you that what you're asking for here is a person to walk a VERY shape edge between the need to bring the best and brightest from people, without making it seem "personal". Actually having this role as an "outsider" to the day to day politics and interpersonal sabatoge of most bay area offices (yeah I lived there five years during the "boom") , gives a layer of abstraction that makes the job easier to perform. When someone is questioning things like style, or code effeciency it comes across MUCH easier (more acadimic) when that person is a "talking head", an IM box, or a voice on the telephone. It becomes less "personalized" and easier to "pick and choose" the best componants into a greater whole. It also isolates the individual who may end up doing a lot of refactoring to present the final solution. Just something to consider. Open youself to the best people in the world and don't accept just the best you can find in your area, and you'll find that you solutions aren't also as limited... -Zac Morris - Original Message - From: Tom Mornini To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:30 PM Subject: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted We're 1 year into development of a system that is OO Perl, mod_perl, DBI and DBD::Oracle on Linux. We've spent a lot of energy doing it right and writing tests as we go. This has given us huge benefits in the life of the project, but our current whitebox tester has decided to move to Washington, D.C. so we need somebody to fill his large shoes. If you're a good Perl programmer who has a strong sense of "the way it should be" and can be simultaneously mean, nasty, angry, distrustful and unforgiving to Perl code and the opposite to people then we'd like to talk to you. This person doesn't do new development, per se, but he is responsible for making things better via testing, fixing, documentation and refactoring. This is a full time job at an office in the South Park area of San Francisco, California, USA. Telecommuters are NOT what we have in mind. Call us old fashioned that way. :-) Pay and benefits are good, though it's no longer 1998. :-) Best benefit is working with a small group of people that are highly motivated by doing it right. -- -- Tom Mornini -- eWingz Systems, Inc. -- -- ICQ: 113526784, AOL, Yahoo, MSN and Jabber: tmornini
Re: Knowing your limitation - was Re: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted
the role you've outlined here, and to be honest I don't think I would BE as successful as I am if I were located directly with either of these teams. The need to have everyone all together is usually indicative of a larger problem in team dynamics, and communications. It usually represents a team in which charasmatic leadership is more important than technical know how or ability to get a job done. Now don't get me wrong, for a person to BE a successful virtual team member they have to have great communication skills, and be open to working with others in multiple formats to enable the best level of teamwork and participation. With all this said, and based on my own personal experience in this role, I can tell you that what you're asking for here is a person to walk a VERY shape edge between the need to bring the best and brightest from people, without making it seem personal. Actually having this role as an outsider to the day to day politics and interpersonal sabatoge of most bay area offices (yeah I lived there five years during the boom) , gives a layer of abstraction that makes the job easier to perform. When someone is questioning things like style, or code effeciency it comes across MUCH easier (more acadimic) when that person is a talking head, an IM box, or a voice on the telephone. It becomes less personalized and easier to pick and choose the best componants into a greater whole. It also isolates the individual who may end up doing a lot of refactoring to present the final solution. Just something to consider. Open youself to the best people in the world and don't accept just the best you can find in your area, and you'll find that you solutions aren't also as limited... -Zac Morris - Original Message - From: Tom Mornini To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 11:30 PM Subject: [JOB] Crack OOP Perl whitebox tester wanted We're 1 year into development of a system that is OO Perl, mod_perl, DBI and DBD::Oracle on Linux. We've spent a lot of energy doing it right and writing tests as we go. This has given us huge benefits in the life of the project, but our current whitebox tester has decided to move to Washington, D.C. so we need somebody to fill his large shoes. If you're a good Perl programmer who has a strong sense of the way it should be and can be simultaneously mean, nasty, angry, distrustful and unforgiving to Perl code and the opposite to people then we'd like to talk to you. This person doesn't do new development, per se, but he is responsible for making things better via testing, fixing, documentation and refactoring. This is a full time job at an office in the South Park area of San Francisco, California, USA. Telecommuters are NOT what we have in mind. Call us old fashioned that way. :-) Pay and benefits are good, though it's no longer 1998. :-) Best benefit is working with a small group of people that are highly motivated by doing it right. -- -- Tom Mornini -- eWingz Systems, Inc. -- -- ICQ: 113526784, AOL, Yahoo, MSN and Jabber: tmornini /blockquote/x-html __ Gunther Birznieks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) eXtropia - The Open Web Technology Company http://www.eXtropia.com/ Office: (65) 64791172 Mobile: (65) 96218290
