Add a comment

 

Re: Re-evaluating software architecture

This is quickly degenerating into the sort of agile discussion I seem to have down the pub on a worryingly regular basis! It's not so fun sober.

I wouldn't say a programmer was fully qualified to program unsupervised if he didn't have a good appreciation of architectural concerns.

You describe a world where the majority of current developers are no longer fit for employment. It's a worthy goal (really!). Unfortunately many projects and businesses rely on low-cost development or have incumbent teams that, for whatever reason, don't meet your criterion. That it might have been better for them in the long run will come as little comfort as their projects fail due to high cost or shortage of resources.

Simon's article was about achieving the sort of teams you describe. Rather than simply wishing they were better, he suggested "unqualified programmers" could be supervised until they were.


Re: Re-evaluating software architecture


Title
Body
HTML : b, strong, i, em, blockquote, br, p, pre, a href="", ul, ol, li, sub, sup
Name
E-mail address
Website
Remember me Yes  No 

E-mail addresses are not publicly displayed, so please only leave your e-mail address if you would like to be notified when new comments are added to this blog entry (you can opt-out later).