Re: mod_perl training (was Re: Certification)
On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 06:13:13PM +0800, Gunther Birznieks wrote: It sounds to me like you have hit the nail on the head. Perhaps what is needed in terms of recouping costs for a mod_perl hands-on development course and/or online course is the open source/collaborative approach. This seems to be a good solution to this problem. Instead of one person sucking up the costs of developing these courses, we could get a group together to do this. Sounds good to me. I would be willing to donate my time to write and initially test the exercises to the slides that are taught for the days. If a couple people were to donate their time to writing the slides based on an outline produced by Stas and Randal. So would I. I'm more than willing to proof read, test, and be a guinea pig. We could host it on sourceforge as the modperltraining project. Sourceforge could also host the mailing list. Then regardless of if Randal would then be willing to take the course material and beta test it as a class he offers (eg maybe giving the course itself would not be profitable for him), we ourselves could be giving this course all over the world in beta-test Perl Monger groups. Yet another good idea. We all love open-source, and collaborative efforts, so let's create a good set of training materials, and then let people teach this material in their own neighborhoods. I know there are still issues such as getting people of the same level of expertise in the same room and mod_perl not being a "core" technology, but I think mod_perl can be taught assuming similar requirements as the PROM class you offer as an initial thought? mod_perl doesn't require all of PROM, but probably about a day of it would be integrated to bring people up to speed on the basics? You lost me here. I'm not sure what "core" technology means. I always thought it would be relatively easy for an experienced teacher to develop a coherent, reliable course for mod_perl, as long as some requirements are met (able to program perl and able to configure and administer an apache server). Once those guidelines are met, discussing the Apache API, going into detail on each of the response phases, and going through examples and exercises, would flow somewhat unfettered. 1. the Apache server life cycle 2. the request loop 3. Discussion of the API for each phase of the loop with examples 4. Exercises This would take about 3 (maybe 4) days with someone who meets the pre-reqs. 1 for the intro and terminology 1 long day to discuss the APIs for each phase (maybe two), and 1 day to go over exercises and have some "lab" work. This is just a rough estimate, and if someone thinks I've lost my coconuts let me know. Getting someone up to speed on mod_perl (not Apache::* modules, but the perl API to Apache), shouldn't take too long. I'd say about 1-1.5 hours for each stop in the request loop. 4-5 hours to teach someone the guts of Apache, including terminology and the real base knowledge stuff, and 8-10 hours to go over exercises, and develop skeleton handlers. We are looking at about 30 hours of hard, hard work. They don't call some training sessions "boot camps" for nothing. Again, feedback is good. Just make it constructive. Calling me a "moronic putz" isn't helpful, but saying "Hey, Moronic Putz, you underestimate " is good. helping with this project, please email me privately. If I get enough people willing to contribute (at least 5), I'll set up the sourceforge project to start the ball rolling Oh yeah, did I say I didn't mind donating my admin time as well to this experiment. :) Count me in. I'll be willing to guinea pig stuff and give feedback, as well as do research and help out more experienced teachers. Later, Gunther JJ -- J. J. Horner [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache, Perl, mod_perl, Web security, Linux
Re: mod_perl training (was Re: Certification)
At 10:45 AM 12/8/2000 -0500, Richard Dice wrote: "Randal L. Schwartz" wrote: But here's the reality of trainings. You need to get 10 to 20 people in a room at the same time that are all starting roughly at the same skill level and also want to end up in the same place. And then you need to do that about 8 to 20 times with the same slide set before you break even, because the cost of producing the materials is pretty high: figure one to three DAYS of research for every HOUR of face time in the classroom. I've been lucky enough to "inherit" (as a subcontractor) sets of Perl training materials put together by a really decent guy named James. I shudder to think of the time investment he made in creating that stuff. He and I have talked from time to time about revising/updating the existing materials, and maybe even creating some new courses, but how to find the time... Mod_perl is a topic I'd really like to work on -- both in terms of teaching and also in putting together the training materials to begin with. I've yet to figure out the "magic formula" to make this work, though. I can't figure out where the "start" and "finish" are with mod_perl that would make sense for 80 to 400 people. It's not core techology, like the llama. We target the llama as how you would want ANY perl hacker to spend their first 30 hours. But what 20-30 hours are *common* for any mod_perl hacker? And what do you do for pre-reqs? These are all really good points. One other slightly-more-minor consideration when it comes to teaching a Perl course is system set-up. If you control the training environment, (ie. you have your own classroom and students come out to it) then this isn't a problem. But if you teach at the client's location, then it can be an issue trying to get their machines configured to the point where you can actually have workshops on what you teach. Mod_perl is a biggie in terms of the kind of setup you have to do: you need a lot of Perl modules installed on the machine, a recent version of Perl, source-code level acceses to building Apache, and not just the time needed to do this to a classroom full of computers, but also _permission_. That all said, I'm sure there will be mod_perl courses available somehow, someday. 5000(0(0?)?) mod_perl hackers can't be wrong. :-) Cheers, Richard At first I read Randal's message I didn't know what to say. It's absolutely true, but it's also very demoralizing to me (to say that it's not profitable to teach mod_perl in the best possible way -- hands on). It sounds to me like you have hit the nail on the head. Perhaps what is needed in terms of recouping costs for a mod_perl hands-on development course and/or online course is the open source/collaborative approach. I would be willing to donate my time to write and initially test the exercises to the slides that are taught for the days. If a couple people were to donate their time to writing the slides based on an outline produced by Stas and Randal. I believe this layered approach would produce some reasonable training material versus someone working on 1 day of training and another person working on another day of training. If we did it that way, the days would not have cohesion. But instead, you get 2 people doing the outline collaboratively. You then get 2 people fleshing out the outline with some comments from the first and then you get 1 person writing the exercises because you want the exercises to build off of each other. The the slides could be slowly improved in a larger open source community after that. I believe Randal's years of Perl training expertise would make him well qualified to at least contribute an outline of what he believes a course in mod_perl should entail and in what general order (kind of like a leader in this aspect if he were willing to take it on). Stas would also be ideal in both contributing a day of training and the outline. Although he hasn't done hands-on training (I presume) and I have never done so (although I've given 1-2 day lectures plenty of times), which is a different matter. Once the rough drafts are produced, it's a matter of having an open source tree where the notes/exercises and slides can be adjusted as time goes on. I would suggest HTML as the format for slides because it would be the easiest to manage as a group project in CVS. We could host it on sourceforge as the modperltraining project. Sourceforge could also host the mailing list. Then regardless of if Randal would then be willing to take the course material and beta test it as a class he offers (eg maybe giving the course itself would not be profitable for him), we ourselves could be giving this course all over the world in beta-test Perl Monger groups. I am pretty sure that if we target 6 months for this project to reach beta, that by then I could give a mod_perl course using an eLinux training room in Singapore for the local Asia crowd. How
RE: [certification]
On Sat, 9 Dec 2000, Gunther Birznieks wrote: However, the fact is that their can be other distinguishing factors on a CV, but to ignore those factors INCLUDING certs is just stupid unless you have the luxury of only having some ridiculously low number of CVs to look at and can spend that time interviewing people because you only have a few straws to grasp. Perhaps you are right if a department is hiring 50 people,get 500 resumes, they are bound to get 10-20% defective or non fitting employees. Certifications perhaps is like firewalls. Certifications/contributions to CPAN, should be use a perhaps a priority items. Such way you can compose a set of people, where each is guaranteed to be able to somehow contribute to a team development, other is when and how these people will be able to fit with one another. Also the other aspect, is work ethics. I can hack perl modules like crazy, but I don't I do diagrams, see that I would have inside out understanding of a problem and possible solutions, and then I code. 90% of people I know just sit down and start to code until it is done. Rewrite the project a few times perhaps. If you want just grunts 'shortlisting' is perfectly fine. Difference between perlfect and alright is very thin one. just 2c Pavel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Certification
The need for certification is a symptom of different problem, which is that the interview process has become too casual. Interviewers are uncomfortable asking the tought questions so they resort to asking the candidate about his hobbies etc. Many years ago a friend of mine who interviewed for HP told me that he had to take a test and was grilled intensely by serveral engineers in sequence before getting hired. Some one even made him solve a partial differential equation on the spot! (this was an RD job) He said that he had never sweated that much during any of his exams in college :) I think the best system might be for each company to design a 15 minute test with a dozen questions skewed to their particular needs and see how the applicant does. It could even be a slightly longer take home test with follow up during the interview process. Tougher the interview, the better the guage of how the person will do under pressure. The certification process is a responsibility for which the companies are passing the buck on (literally speaking) to the testing firms. bakki -- _ _ .-. |M|S| Bakki Kudva |D|_|a|y| Navaco |o|m|n|s|\420 Pasadena Drive |c|e|a|t| \\ Erie, PA 16505-1037 |u|n|g|e| \\ http://www.navaco.com/ | |T|e|m| \ ph: 814-833-2592 "" fax:603-947-5747 e-Docs - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [certification]
-Original Message- From: Gunther Birznieks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] "Obviously they still have to be technically interviewed, but in lieu of someone with or without certification, it's easier to short-list on the basis of such certification (or some equivalent outstanding thing such as contributing to CPAN)." If you are 'short-listing' based on certification, you may be missing your best candidates... David Hill - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_perl training (was Re: Certification)
"Randal L. Schwartz" wrote: But here's the reality of trainings. You need to get 10 to 20 people in a room at the same time that are all starting roughly at the same skill level and also want to end up in the same place. And then you need to do that about 8 to 20 times with the same slide set before you break even, because the cost of producing the materials is pretty high: figure one to three DAYS of research for every HOUR of face time in the classroom. I've been lucky enough to "inherit" (as a subcontractor) sets of Perl training materials put together by a really decent guy named James. I shudder to think of the time investment he made in creating that stuff. He and I have talked from time to time about revising/updating the existing materials, and maybe even creating some new courses, but how to find the time... Mod_perl is a topic I'd really like to work on -- both in terms of teaching and also in putting together the training materials to begin with. I've yet to figure out the "magic formula" to make this work, though. I can't figure out where the "start" and "finish" are with mod_perl that would make sense for 80 to 400 people. It's not core techology, like the llama. We target the llama as how you would want ANY perl hacker to spend their first 30 hours. But what 20-30 hours are *common* for any mod_perl hacker? And what do you do for pre-reqs? These are all really good points. One other slightly-more-minor consideration when it comes to teaching a Perl course is system set-up. If you control the training environment, (ie. you have your own classroom and students come out to it) then this isn't a problem. But if you teach at the client's location, then it can be an issue trying to get their machines configured to the point where you can actually have workshops on what you teach. Mod_perl is a biggie in terms of the kind of setup you have to do: you need a lot of Perl modules installed on the machine, a recent version of Perl, source-code level acceses to building Apache, and not just the time needed to do this to a classroom full of computers, but also _permission_. That all said, I'm sure there will be mod_perl courses available somehow, someday. 5000(0(0?)?) mod_perl hackers can't be wrong. :-) Cheers, Richard -- Richard Dice * Personal 519 635 9568 * Fax 519 635 9569 ShadNet Creator * http://shadnet.shad.ca/ * [EMAIL PROTECTED] Occasional Writer, HotWired * http://www.hotwired.com/webmonkey/ "squeeze the world 'til it's small enough to join us heel to toe" - jesus jones - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [certification]
You miss the point. It's not about credentials in a boolean sense. It's about probability and statistics. That's exactly true - in fact I'd go so far to say that the probably and statistics vary for each type of certification. I trust an M.D.'s certification far greater than I trust an MCSE certification, because I can be pretty sure the doctor completed his education and had to actually think a little to accomplish that. The MCSE, not so much. A few months of memorization (quickly forgotten) does not mean the same as 7 years in med school. It all comes down to what certifications the employer trusts. We (in effect the M.D.'s employer) trust their medical degree. Not because some company ran a marketing campaign to tell us that we should, but from our own experience, and the experience of others. However, Microsoft simply runs an ad campaign telling employers that they can trust MCSE's - and why should they believe otherwise? 8^( Steve - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mod_perl training (was Re: Certification)
In a message dated 12/8/00 10:48:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I can't figure out where the "start" and "finish" are with mod_perl that would make sense for 80 to 400 people. It's not core techology, like the llama. We target the llama as how you would want ANY perl hacker to spend their first 30 hours. But what 20-30 hours are *common* for any mod_perl hacker? And what do you do for pre-reqs? Make the course for someone who knows whatever intermediate perl, knowing basic C will help the student. Combine it with and advanced perl course. Cover.. 1. Using Perl to Configure Apache 2. .xs programming, and When to use It 3. Callback functions and what that means for signals 4. the mod_perl API 5. briefly, using apxs 5. "Fall back to" secure settings. CERT's safe CGI, Exec/CGI, suexec, tcpd-wrappers, mod_ssl, anyone who runs anything under Apache::Registry has X privs 6. A sample mod_perl module (trans, Acc/Auth/Authz, fixup) 7. BlockRobot Timer et cetera as time allows
RE: [certification]
At 09:39 AM 12/8/00 -0600, Hill, David T - Belo Corporate wrote: -Original Message- From: Gunther Birznieks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] "Obviously they still have to be technically interviewed, but in lieu of someone with or without certification, it's easier to short-list on the basis of such certification (or some equivalent outstanding thing such as contributing to CPAN)." If you are 'short-listing' based on certification, you may be missing your best candidates... Whatever. You missed my point entirely and took my posts on this subject out of context. The point is about probability and statistics. There is no way when a hiring manager gets 100 CVs that they can look through them all with a fine tooth comb especially when geeks tend to SUCK at writing CVs (eg 80% seem to feel that they have to write a 20 pages that say nothing but pisses off the reader). Also, I didn't say certs are the only way to short-list. So are advanced degrees (not necessarily CS), someone who has written tutorials, someone who has contributed to open source (eg says on their CV they have modules on CPAN), etc. Certs are ONE distinguishing factor. OK, tell you what. I guess the next time I put an ad in the paper, I'll just tell people to send me just their name and phone number so I can set up an interview. Because according to this sentiment, if I pay attention to distinguishing factors on their CV then I might be missing some of my best candidates if I do so, so I might as well interview 'em all! BZZT! Wrong answer. Screw that. It doesn't work that way. There is limited time in this world to call people in for interviews. If anyone thinks distinguishing factors should not affect the way a hiring manager reads a CV has their head in a cloud. Anyway, I apologize for giving harsh example -- but it seems that there's no other way to demonstrate this. The fact is that certs help and certs are important. But the degree to which they are important is another issue entirely. And I concede that it may be too early for certs being necessary for mod_perl itself because it's not reached an adequate critical mass as pointed out earlier. However, the fact is that their can be other distinguishing factors on a CV, but to ignore those factors INCLUDING certs is just stupid unless you have the luxury of only having some ridiculously low number of CVs to look at and can spend that time interviewing people because you only have a few straws to grasp. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Certification
If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . Ask yourself this question: Are you in need of a mod_perl job? If so, I'm willing to bet that there are employers who would snap you up in a second. As has been said a few times here, certification is pretty pointless unless you need some distinguishing factor. With mod_perl, the distinguishing factor is that you're available! This is an interesting thread. Just one point though ... just who is available? Are they any good? Have they any experience? Are they telling the truth? Certification may be an issue that deserves careful attention, before idiots go and try to implement mod_perl solutions, make a complete pig's ear and give us all a bad name. John Reid OpenConnect (Ireland) Ltd - You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear ... ... but it does make a rather attractive novelty luggage tag. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.215 / Virus Database: 101 - Release Date: 16/11/2000 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Certification
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, J. J. Horner wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . Ask yourself this question: Are you in need of a mod_perl job? If so, I'm willing to bet that there are employers who would snap you up in a second. snip On the flip side, if you're an employer looking for a good mod_perl programmer, they're hard to find, and if you do find them, they're quirky. ;) I liked the idea of incorporating the local perl mongers groups into the teaching/training/advocacy process. I proposed it to my local group as a possibility. Perhaps it would help to get some standards though (similiar to a certification process) that the groups could follow. Perhaps areas to cover, standard tests, etc. Things that would lead a person to getting really certified when/if such a thing exists. Jay Jacobs - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
Somebody wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . You're way off base. Figure out the wife. I've never hired a "certified" engineer, and almost without exception the ones I've come across were empty sacks of shit. In fact, I've had great success doing exactly the opposite, and *hiring the wrong guy*. Take a person who's been writing compiler back ends for the last 10 years. This person is constantly pigeonholed by every headhunter out there into yet another compiler job, and he'd give his eye teeth to do something different. You hire him for something completely different, and he ends up being the most enthusiastic and productive person you've got, because everything's new and exciting to him. And believe me, folks, if he can write the back end to a compiler, he can figure out mod_perl. Or, I could hire Ferd over here, with a limp certificate from Randal saying he's passed some clever little test on the six most obscure ways to mumble. Uh, no thanks. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Certification
When MCSE's were just starting to be issued, no one thought that they were important either. However, the PHB's who do the hiring said "Oo, you have a sheet of paper from M$ that says your ok. You're hired!" My point is that if you are trying to appeal to the businesses, please look at what has worked in the past for others and see if it can work for Perl as well. Perl needs to move out of the hacker market and in to the mainstream if it is to thrive. In order to move into the mainstream and take its rightful place with Java, it's go to have a perception change. I think that certification would certainly help. Where can I go to get mine? John Reid wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . Ask yourself this question: Are you in need of a mod_perl job? If so, I'm willing to bet that there are employers who would snap you up in a second. As has been said a few times here, certification is pretty pointless unless you need some distinguishing factor. With mod_perl, the distinguishing factor is that you're available! This is an interesting thread. Just one point though ... just who is available? Are they any good? Have they any experience? Are they telling the truth? Certification may be an issue that deserves careful attention, before idiots go and try to implement mod_perl solutions, make a complete pig's ear and give us all a bad name. John Reid OpenConnect (Ireland) Ltd - You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear ... ... but it does make a rather attractive novelty luggage tag. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.215 / Virus Database: 101 - Release Date: 16/11/2000 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jimi Thompson Web Master L3 communications "It's the same thing we do every night, Pinky." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Certification
John Reid writes: [ cc list trimmed. ] jr This is an interesting thread. Just one point though ... just jr who is available? hey, i'm available. boston and cambridge only, i'm afraid. jr Are they any good? Have they any experience? Are they telling jr the truth? well, it's doubtful that certification really resolves these problems. all certification tells a potential employer is that someone has had exposure to the technology, not how competent they would be at providing solutions using it. even if someone were able to pass an examination, that's not the same thing as assessing a problem, deciding which technology will best solve that problem, then implementing that solution in some sort of timeframe. i think lie detectors during the interview might be the only answer, right after the drug test of course. cheers, k. -- kevin montuori support independent booksellers -- http://www.booksense.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Certification
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 05:10:58PM -, John Reid wrote: Certification may be an issue that deserves careful attention, before idiots go and try to implement mod_perl solutions, make a complete pig's ear and give us all a bad name. I wouldnt be too worried about that. For better or worse, I feel that the complexity involved in getting the various Apache::WipeMyAss (as brian m. put it so eloquently :) configured and working together, kinda ensures that a mod_perl app, if built, is going to be of reasonable high quality :) Ajit - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Certification
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, J. J. Horner wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . Ask yourself this question: Are you in need of a mod_perl job? If so, I'm willing to bet that there are employers who would snap you up in a second. As has been said a few times here, certification is pretty pointless unless you need some distinguishing factor. With mod_perl, the distinguishing factor is that you're available! (my apologies if this has already been said, I'm still catching up...) yes and no. having a certification program implies a lot more than just that there will be something employers can look at. I would expect that the real value comes from the fact that a lot of hard work has gone into a building a training program, which will by it's nature create more mod_perl programmers ... how many is subject to question, but if you can point prospective candidates at the list of hungry employers, then it should be fairly successfull... It's my belief that part of the reason microsoft has been so successfull is that they have made it so easy for schools/institutes to teach their material ... thus more students studying the M$ way, thus more folks "selling" microsoft solutions... ... anyone who wants to teach an NT course just asks microsoft for the curriculum... but wanna teach a linux course and your options are (or were, things may have changed) less clear, and you're more likely to have to build it yourself... given the quality and motivation levels of most schools/institutes/instructors the choice is clear... especially when they get to ride on the promotion bandwagon that microsoft has prepared... -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | What I like about deadlines is the lovely http://BareMetal.com/ | whooshing they make as they rush past. web hosting since '95 | - Douglas Adams - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
I agree with Eric, for consultants you should focus on skills and brains and for employees you should focus on BRAINS. They will be there long enough to pick up the skills and pay you back for the time you spent training them. Remember smart people learn fast so it is not that much time spent on training. Also this will build loyalty and that translates into lower turnover. marc ps I have never done any hiring in my life. - Original Message - From: Eric Strovink [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 7. December 2000 12:52 Subject: Re: [certification] Somebody wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . You're way off base. Figure out the wife. I've never hired a "certified" engineer, and almost without exception the ones I've come across were empty sacks of shit. In fact, I've had great success doing exactly the opposite, and *hiring the wrong guy*. Take a person who's been writing compiler back ends for the last 10 years. This person is constantly pigeonholed by every headhunter out there into yet another compiler job, and he'd give his eye teeth to do something different. You hire him for something completely different, and he ends up being the most enthusiastic and productive person you've got, because everything's new and exciting to him. And believe me, folks, if he can write the back end to a compiler, he can figure out mod_perl. Or, I could hire Ferd over here, with a limp certificate from Randal saying he's passed some clever little test on the six most obscure ways to mumble. Uh, no thanks. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
Eric, You fail to understand that while you are probably a geeks dream boss, you are not the average PHB. Heck, your hair is probably limp ;). The idea here is to gain acceptance and even status with the PHB. PHB's like paper. It doesn't matter if its a useful piece of paper or not (MCSE's are a PRIME example of a useless paper - as are many college degrees). They live for paper. Its job security for them. It makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside. It also allows them to cover their butts should anything go wrong with said hire-ee. Eric Strovink wrote: Somebody wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . You're way off base. Figure out the wife. I've never hired a "certified" engineer, and almost without exception the ones I've come across were empty sacks of shit. In fact, I've had great success doing exactly the opposite, and *hiring the wrong guy*. Take a person who's been writing compiler back ends for the last 10 years. This person is constantly pigeonholed by every headhunter out there into yet another compiler job, and he'd give his eye teeth to do something different. You hire him for something completely different, and he ends up being the most enthusiastic and productive person you've got, because everything's new and exciting to him. And believe me, folks, if he can write the back end to a compiler, he can figure out mod_perl. Or, I could hire Ferd over here, with a limp certificate from Randal saying he's passed some clever little test on the six most obscure ways to mumble. Uh, no thanks. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jimi Thompson Web Master L3 communications "It's the same thing we do every night, Pinky." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
--On Thursday, December 07, 2000 12:52:44 PM -0500 Eric Strovink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . You're way off base. Figure out the wife. I've never hired a "certified" engineer, and almost without exception the ones I've come across were empty sacks of shit. I'd have to concur. A certificate means you can pass a test, it doesn't mean you can code your way out of wet paper bag. I consider myself a very good coder, but I don't do well on true/false, multiple choice, and similar kinds of tests. I've also done hiring, and in my previous job, I regularly did peer interviews. I can discover far more about a person's abilities by talking to him or her for a few minutes and exploring some hypothetical ideas and/or programming scenarios or just talking about stuff they've written. -- Rob _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ /\_\_\_\_\/\_\ /\_\_\_\_\_\ /\/_/_/_/_/ /\/_/ \/_/_/_/_/_/ QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT, /\/_/__\/_/ __/\/_//\/_/ PROFUNDUM VIDITUR /\/_/_/_/_/ /\_\ /\/_//\/_/ /\/_/ \/_/ /\/_/_/\/_//\/_/ (Whatever is said in Latin \/_/ \/_/ \/_/_/_/_/ \/_/ appears profound) Rob Tanner McMinnville, Oregon [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP signature
Re: [certification]
See - I KNEW IT!!! You aren't a PHB. You have to look at this like a PHB. PHB's don't care if the paper means anything relevant. PHB's live for Plausible Deniability and Glory Hogging. If they can't take credit for it, they don't want to get blamed for it either. If anything goes wrong, they want to be able to say that he had fill in the blank so I thought he was qualified. On the other hand, if it does well then he can then take the credit because the person he hired had fill in the blank. Heck, I got started in the IT business professionally years ago because I fooled a PHB into letting me take over his network while working on a degree in Biochemistry. He actually thought it had something to do with computers. Geeks know its just paper and that paper three appropriate uses (for writing on, paper airplanes, and TP). Geeks know that paper doesn't pass for credentials. The PHB's haven't gotten around to that idea yet. They probably never will. Personally, I don't mind getting the paper. It usually means that the PHB's are willing to put more zero's on my paycheck because I have acquired another piece of paper. Getting more zero's from the PHB's is a good thing. Eric Strovink wrote: You smoked me out -- lots of hair, all limp. And yes, I am a "geeks dream boss." I'm a geek. Jimi Thompson wrote: Eric, You fail to understand that while you are probably a geeks dream boss, you are not the average PHB. Heck, your hair is probably limp ;). The idea here is to gain acceptance and even status with the PHB. PHB's like paper. It doesn't matter if its a useful piece of paper or not (MCSE's are a PRIME example of a useless paper - as are many college degrees). They live for paper. Its job security for them. It makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside. It also allows them to cover their butts should anything go wrong with said hire-ee. Eric Strovink wrote: Somebody wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . You're way off base. Figure out the wife. I've never hired a "certified" engineer, and almost without exception the ones I've come across were empty sacks of shit. In fact, I've had great success doing exactly the opposite, and *hiring the wrong guy*. Take a person who's been writing compiler back ends for the last 10 years. This person is constantly pigeonholed by every headhunter out there into yet another compiler job, and he'd give his eye teeth to do something different. You hire him for something completely different, and he ends up being the most enthusiastic and productive person you've got, because everything's new and exciting to him. And believe me, folks, if he can write the back end to a compiler, he can figure out mod_perl. Or, I could hire Ferd over here, with a limp certificate from Randal saying he's passed some clever little test on the six most obscure ways to mumble. Uh, no thanks. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jimi Thompson Web Master L3 communications "It's the same thing we do every night, Pinky." -- Jimi Thompson Web Master L3 communications "It's the same thing we do every night, Pinky." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
Certification does have its merits. I know this analogy is not quite correct but its the only one that comes to mind. Would you have a nurse or a doctor treat your abdominal pains? I rather not have the abdominal pains in the first place but I rather have the doctor treat me than the nurse. If money was not an big issue, would you have a plumber or a certified plumber working on your broken bathroom pipe? Sadly but true that a lot of "certified" professionals whatever out there are who are not really deserving of the title "certified ...". How, as a business owner, manager, etc., determine whether or not you are as good as you say you are? Its difficult unless you personally know him. I believe that certification is a good thing. It gives a field of expertise credibility. It can make it attractive for people to choose a field of study. My question is now: Is it possible for a open source community to certified each other? Is it credible? Flames welcome, ..todd Somebody wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . You're way off base. Figure out the wife. I've never hired a "certified" engineer, and almost without exception the ones I've come across were empty sacks of shit. I'd have to concur. A certificate means you can pass a test, it doesn't mean you can code your way out of wet paper bag. I consider myself a very good coder, but I don't do well on true/false, multiple choice, and similar kinds of tests. I've also done hiring, and in my previous job, I regularly did peer interviews. I can discover far more about a person's abilities by talking to him or her for a few minutes and exploring some hypothetical ideas and/or programming scenarios or just talking about stuff they've written. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Certification
At the very least even if there is no certification, perhaps just a training course on mod_perl from Merlyn/Stonehenge would act in lieu of such. If I knew someone had trained for a week with Randal's company in either OO Perl technology (PROM) or mod_perl (a course that doesn't seem to exist on StoneHenge yet), I would definitely take more than a 2nd glance at a stack of CVs that all claim to know Perl equally well. It's not about blindly hiring someone with certs or a training course, but about sifting through a ton of CVs where everyone and sometimes their mothers claim they know Java and/or Perl and shortlisting them among the ones to call. Of course, I don't have that problem in Singapore where few people claim to know Perl -- but in UK and USA, I always had people writing Perl this and Perl that on their CVs. Just the fact that StoneHenge could act as a spreader of mod_perl technology through its training would perhaps add some legitimacy. Where do people go for mod_perl training now? They have to wait for ApacheCon and PerlCon. And even then (no offense to Stas great presentations) it's a day or two course in a lecture rather than hands-on format. A lecture format is great for spreading the word at the conferences, but hands-on training would be even better. Or perhaps there isn't a demand for mod_perl training in which case I guess that's a business decision. I think I was wrong the cert thing... perhaps it is premature. I don't think I am wrong that a cert would be a good idea eventually -- and hopefully it will be a debate we can have next year when its hopefully applicable. And for now it is probably correct that if a person knows mod_perl they will be snapped up in the job market anyway. At 12:59 PM 12/7/00 -0600, Jimi Thompson wrote: When MCSE's were just starting to be issued, no one thought that they were important either. However, the PHB's who do the hiring said "Oo, you have a sheet of paper from M$ that says your ok. You're hired!" My point is that if you are trying to appeal to the businesses, please look at what has worked in the past for others and see if it can work for Perl as well. Perl needs to move out of the hacker market and in to the mainstream if it is to thrive. In order to move into the mainstream and take its rightful place with Java, it's go to have a perception change. I think that certification would certainly help. Where can I go to get mine? John Reid wrote: If I'm way off base, please let me know. I'm spending considerable brain power on this idea and if I'm wasting it, I need to know. I don't have much spare brain power and I could use it to try to figure out my wife . . . Ask yourself this question: Are you in need of a mod_perl job? If so, I'm willing to bet that there are employers who would snap you up in a second. As has been said a few times here, certification is pretty pointless unless you need some distinguishing factor. With mod_perl, the distinguishing factor is that you're available! This is an interesting thread. Just one point though ... just who is available? Are they any good? Have they any experience? Are they telling the truth? Certification may be an issue that deserves careful attention, before idiots go and try to implement mod_perl solutions, make a complete pig's ear and give us all a bad name. John Reid OpenConnect (Ireland) Ltd - You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear ... ... but it does make a rather attractive novelty luggage tag. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.215 / Virus Database: 101 - Release Date: 16/11/2000 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jimi Thompson Web Master L3 communications "It's the same thing we do every night, Pinky." - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Gunther Birznieks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) eXtropia - The Web Technology Company http://www.extropia.com/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
At 05:55 PM 12/7/00 -0600, Jimi Thompson wrote: Geeks know its just paper and that paper three appropriate uses (for writing on, paper airplanes, and TP). Geeks know that paper doesn't pass for credentials. The PHB's haven't You miss the point. It's not about credentials in a boolean sense. It's about probability and statistics. Someone who has credentials/training on their CV increases the probability that they know something, it doesn't mean they definitely know something. Obviously they still have to be technically interviewed, but in lieu of someone with or without certification, it's easier to short-list on the basis of such certification (or some equivalent outstanding thing such as contributing to CPAN). Everyone knows that a University Degree in CS doesn't mean someone is a great programmer. And there's a ton of people out there who prove otherwise. BUT out of people who are hacks and people who have degrees in CS, the people with degrees in CS have a tendency to have a background that make them better programmers. Also different types of certs have different probabilities. A lot of people know MCSE means little nowadays. But an MCSD is fairly difficult from what I understand. And on the other end of the spectrum, the couple of people I know who are fully 100% CISCO certified through and through are like networking Gods (at least to me). Degrees and certifications help narrow things down. It doesn't mean they are perfect, but they definitely are not just TP as you so eloquently put it. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [certification]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The day after the technology stabilizes one can decide
what to certify people to do.
If Perl6 is two+ years off, 5.6 certification makes sense.
If Apache2.0/Modperl2.0 are x:{x2,10} months off
are taking up a lot of Doug's and other mod_perl CPAN
developers busy adapting/adopting to hooks, filters, and
whatever 5.6 threw at them, I'll suggest that
Mod_Perl Certification might solve some problems, but
I think it is important to cerify stable things.
- -JoshNarins
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use http://www.pgp.com
iQA/AwUBOjA6aYTObnlpZMc5EQKPyACaAuiGPoMx/3l9hBXVYvZAL9cxUyEAnAkG
PECE5yqwk/ZcSa9RAlOTJj7l
=WgMW
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [certification]
--On Thursday, December 07, 2000 05:55:41 PM -0600 Jimi Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See - I KNEW IT!!! You aren't a PHB. You have to look at this like a PHB. PHB's don't care if the paper means anything relevant. PHB's live for Plausible Deniability and Glory Hogging. If they can't take credit for it, they don't want to get blamed for it either. If anything goes wrong, they want to be able to say that he had fill in the blank so I thought he was qualified. On the other hand, if it does well then he can then take the credit because the person he hired had fill in the blank. That may well be true -- I won't dispute it. :-) But the real question is, and maybe this is the pivotal point of the whole issue -- is that the kind of place you want to work at? Where the hiring process becomes so separated from the actual work that you're evaluated by your certificates, you and your certificates become one and are interchangeable. You're no longer a whole and complete person and become reduced to but a "certificate" of your former self. It's a dehumanization, and unfortunately, a fairly wide-spread trend. On the up side, however, it does tell me where to not even bother applying. -- Rob _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ /\_\_\_\_\/\_\ /\_\_\_\_\_\ /\/_/_/_/_/ /\/_/ \/_/_/_/_/_/ QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT, /\/_/__\/_/ __/\/_//\/_/ PROFUNDUM VIDITUR /\/_/_/_/_/ /\_\ /\/_//\/_/ /\/_/ \/_/ /\/_/_/\/_//\/_/ (Whatever is said in Latin \/_/ \/_/ \/_/_/_/_/ \/_/ appears profound) Rob Tanner McMinnville, Oregon [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP signature
Re: [certification]
At 06:30 PM 12/7/2000 -0800, Rob Tanner wrote: --On Thursday, December 07, 2000 05:55:41 PM -0600 Jimi Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See - I KNEW IT!!! You aren't a PHB. You have to look at this like a PHB. PHB's don't care if the paper means anything relevant. PHB's live for Plausible Deniability and Glory Hogging. If they can't take credit for it, they don't want to get blamed for it either. If anything goes wrong, they want to be able to say that he had fill in the blank so I thought he was qualified. On the other hand, if it does well then he can then take the credit because the person he hired had fill in the blank. That may well be true -- I won't dispute it. :-) But the real question is, and maybe this is the pivotal point of the whole issue -- is that the kind of place you want to work at? Where the hiring process becomes so separated from the actual work that you're evaluated by your certificates, you and your certificates become one and are interchangeable. You're no longer a whole and complete person and become reduced to but a "certificate" of your former self. It's a dehumanization, and unfortunately, a fairly wide-spread trend. On the up side, however, it does tell me where to not even bother applying. I've never been in a place that only hired people with certificates. But again, to me it's not about the certs being a boolean decision to hire or not, it's about probabilities. If someone doesn't have experience except they have a cert, I'll see them. If you have no cert but you have demonstrated experience on your CV, I'll see you. If you have no cert and no demonstrated experience, unless I am desperate or am willing to hire interns/juniors (which I do hire but its not appropriate for some projects), I won't see you. As a person doing hiring, I don't think I am alone in this matter. So the certs, degrees, training stuff all help. And it's not dehumanizing. It's just another factor on the CV that can help boost someone's chances of getting noticed among all the CVs that lie and say they know Perl with nothing to back it up. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mod_perl training (was Re: Certification)
"Gunther" == Gunther Birznieks [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gunther A lecture format is great for spreading the word at the Gunther conferences, but hands-on training would be even better. Or Gunther perhaps there isn't a demand for mod_perl training in which Gunther case I guess that's a business decision. Hmm. I guess I can speak to that. :) I have seen that hands-on gets the stuff to stick longer, and also has people ask more intelligent questions later in the course. So I agree with you there... I think people would get more out of a hands-on course than a lecture seminar. But here's the reality of trainings. You need to get 10 to 20 people in a room at the same time that are all starting roughly at the same skill level and also want to end up in the same place. And then you need to do that about 8 to 20 times with the same slide set before you break even, because the cost of producing the materials is pretty high: figure one to three DAYS of research for every HOUR of face time in the classroom. I can't figure out where the "start" and "finish" are with mod_perl that would make sense for 80 to 400 people. It's not core techology, like the llama. We target the llama as how you would want ANY perl hacker to spend their first 30 hours. But what 20-30 hours are *common* for any mod_perl hacker? And what do you do for pre-reqs? Training is a tough business. I've been damn lucky, and moderately skilled to have had the privilege to train thousands of satisfied customers, and sell hundreds of thousands of book. And I'd love to see more mod_perl hackers out there. But it's gotta make sense to me financially before I commit resources to it. I'm a small business. I can't absorb training at a loss for very long. Hope that helps you see what you need to tell me to get me to do this. (nudge nudge) -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
