Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: Hiring : was Re: [XP] The amazing misunderstanding of XP

Expand Messages
  • Bob Bertolatus
    ... From: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com [mailto:extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken Boucher Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:58 PM To:
    Message 1 of 49 , Feb 1 11:36 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      -----Original Message-----
      From: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      [mailto:extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken Boucher
      Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:58 PM
      To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Hiring : was Re: [XP] The amazing misunderstanding of XP


      > We have approximately four teams in the same physical area. You are
      > right, wall space is always at a premium. We use a couple of
      > techniques. We have a bunch of little 24 or 30 inch wide rolling white

      > boards. We have one or two larger rolling whiteboards. We put the open

      > development area around the outside of the room, and put cubes in the
      > center for customers, project managers, etc.

      http://fairlygoodpractices.com/rolling.htm for photos of the
      whiteboards.

      A shot of our old room (same theory) can be found at
      http://fairlygoodpractices.com/open.htm (and now that I look, I see a
      rolling whiteboard there as well...)





      To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...

      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...

      ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • whojgalt04
      ... could ... candidate ... It wasn t pair programming, but in the last job I had, I later found my interview test code in the production system. I looked at
      Message 49 of 49 , Feb 7 11:33 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Larry Brunelle
        <brunelle@...> wrote:
        >
        > Steven Gordon wrote:
        > > I wonder how much of the code produced by pairing with candidates
        could
        > > actually be leveraged. Would there be an obligation to pay the
        candidate
        > > for an hour of work if the code developed in the pairing session was
        > > actually used?

        > o Regardless of good faith, who DOES own that code?


        It wasn't pair programming, but in the last job I had, I later found
        my interview test code in the production system. I looked at it as a
        compliment, but it did strike me a little off, and I still joke about
        how they used me...

        I'd say that the upstanding way to do it is that the test code is
        destroyed, except for maybe a printed copy in the employee's file, and
        if he is hired, then he can do it again "for real" once on the job if
        needed. It just avoids any misunderstandings or temptations that way.

        --Kyle Bennett
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.