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

Re: licensing software engineers (was Re: [XP] IEEE SWEBOK Is Looking for Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention XP, Agile, etc.)

Expand Messages
  • Keith Ray
    ... There are a few things going against adoption of SWEBOK licensing. Most big companies (Apple, Microsoft, etc.) don t have that heavyweight a development
    Message 1 of 40 , Jun 1, 2003
      On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 06:18 PM, Cem Kaner wrote:

      > they had a big success), these companies are pressing to pull software
      > sales out of the scope of the American Law of Sales (Article 2 of the
      > [...]
      > What does this have to do with licensing?
      >
      > Malpractice law applies to the individual engineer, not to the software
      > company as a whole. If an enraged public demands accountability for bad
      > software, throwing us (software development consultants) to the wolves
      > is the first line of defense. Legislators can pass a law that looks
      > [...]

      There are a few things going against adoption of SWEBOK licensing.

      Most big companies (Apple, Microsoft, etc.) don't have that heavyweight
      a development process and would fight against anything perceived as
      raising their costs. They'd rather move all development to India than
      be forced to change their practices. I've worked at Apple, and someone
      in Microsoft's "process group" said they're recommending XP to other
      groups internally. Big companies fear increased costs more than they
      fear paying campaign contributions. Just make sure the higher-ups in
      your companies know the threat of SWEBOK licensing to their
      bottom-lines.

      It would be very easy for an individual engineer accused of malpractice
      to take the company he works for down with him.
      Laywer: did you draw a design in UML before coding?
      Defendant: well, we drew some boxes and lines on a whiteboard...
      Lawyer: but you have nothing on paper? Why didn't you use the CASE tool?
      Defendant: no one uses the CASE tool. My boss said to stop wasting time.
      Witness: yes, we didn't install the CASE tool because it couldn't
      reverse-engineer and it wasn't compatible with WindowsXP.

      C. Keith Ray
      <http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/index.html>
      <http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/xpminifaq.html>
      <http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/resume.html>
    • Brian Christopher Robinson
      ... With the licensed software engineer held accountable? This would be a HUGE change. For instance, as the team lead on a project I certainly would not
      Message 40 of 40 , Jun 2, 2003
        On Sat, 31 May 2003, Cem Kaner wrote:

        > As to the practices that will be required on "licensed" jobs, I think
        > SWEBOK lays out the baseline. A lawsuit for professional negligence
        > asserts that an individual service provider failed to provide services
        > that conform to the accepted minimum standard of competence in the
        > profession.

        With the licensed software engineer held accountable? This would be a
        HUGE change. For instance, as the team lead on a project I certainly
        would not allow the project to be shipped by my manager despite known
        bugs. This is a common enough practice that it strikes true fear into
        me.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.