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
  • yahoogroups@jhrothjr.com
    ... From: Cem Kaner To: extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com
    Message 1 of 40 , Jun 1, 2003
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Cem Kaner" <kaner.at.kaner.com@...>
      To: "extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com"
      <extremeprogramming.at.yahoogroups.com@...>
      Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 1:20 PM
      Subject: Re: licensing software engineers (was Re: [XP] IEEE SWEBOK Is
      Looking for Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention XP, Agile, etc.)


      > John Roth said:
      >
      > > any company developing software will have
      > > to maintain a licensed engineer to oversee the process.
      >
      > Cem Kaner responds:
      >
      > I'm not sure this is correct. I agree that a company that made
      > life-critical software would be foolish to not have a licensed engineer
      > as overseer. But for commercial software -- unless there is a
      > regulation or law that I am unaware of -- no such legal requirement
      > exists. Unless the company promises the use of licensed engineers in
      > its warranties (not likely) or is otherwise required by contract to
      > have an engineer, a software publisher will not be required to use
      > licensed engineers.
      >
      > Are you aware of a statute or regulation that would require this?

      It doesn't exist currently since there is no licensed Software Engineer
      category to hang it on (see my previous post on the subject.)

      However, it's strictly in accordance with the way all the other
      licensed engineering professions work. There are tasks that require
      a licensed professional engineer's signature on the dotted line.

      Once you have such a category, legislation will be enacted that
      will require it. You can't stop it; the progression is about like a
      landslide moving downward.

      John Roth

      >
      > On Sunday, June 1, 2003, at 12:50 PM, yahoogroups@... wrote:
      >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: "Cem Kaner" <kaner.at.kaner.com@...>
      > > To: "extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com"
      > > <extremeprogramming.at.yahoogroups.com@...>
      > > Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2003 11:54 AM
      > > Subject: Re: licensing software engineers (was Re: [XP] IEEE SWEBOK Is
      > > Looking for Reviewers--They Don't Even Mention XP, Agile, etc.)
      > >
      > >
      > >>
      > >> One factor that is easy to dispose of is that the licensing will not
      > >> necessarily increase the software publisher's labor cost. In fact, the
      > >> distinction might help limit costs. The in-house developer need not be
      > >> licensed. Engineering licensing is different from law and medicine.
      > >> People do electrical, mechanical, etc. engineering all the time
      > >> without
      > >> being licensed as engineers. Relatively few graduates of engineering
      > >> programs become P.E.'s. Only the independents must be licensed. So the
      > >> only people at MS (etc) who would have to be licensed would be the
      > >> independent consultants.
      > >
      > > Not exactly true. It is true that the independents will have to
      > > be licensed, but any company developing software will have
      > > to maintain a licensed engineer to oversee the process.
      > >
      > > If I hire a company to build a road, there had better be a
      > > licensed Civil Engineer somewhere to sign off on the plans,
      > > for example. That doesn't, of course, mean that he actually
      > > worked on the project, or that anyone on the project was
      > > a licensed professional engineer.
      > >
      > > John Roth
      > >
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      > >
      > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      > > extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      > >
      > > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > Cem Kaner, Professor, Department of Computer Sciences,
      > Florida Institute of Technology, 150 West University Blvd.
      > Melbourne, FL 32901.
      > Senior author of
      > Lessons Learned in Software Testing
      > Testing Computer Software, and
      > Bad Software: What to Do When Software Fails.
      >
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >
      > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
    • 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.