On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 13:28:40 +0100
"Jacek Artymiak (devGuide.net)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
Greetings!
Thanks to Jacek there are some sort of digest for recently discussed
topics. Let me pass trough it.
Well, any professional may be disposed by ability to solve selected
tasks. The xBSD profy uses BSF-family products for him (her) solutions.
Thus, IMHO we should moved to the task-oriented certifications. That
might be:
- system administration;
- system development;
- application development.
Each of directions listed above will include some set of tests. For
example, as already had mentioned, for system administrator that topics
nicely covered by SAGE descriptions (see "Check Offs").
For the two development directions under BSD systems there are not so
smooth (at least as for me). Those possible includes:
- Open Source licensing and distribution;
- BSD style coding and development models;
- tools and frameworks;
- optimization...
For system developers this also should cover:
- devices and drivers, kernel modules;
- filesystems;
- process management and scheduling;
- kernel debugging and problem pursuing;
- emulation layers;
- porting to new platforms...
> 1) Certificate duration. I'd vote for 2 years. That seems to be a
> fairly reasonable period of time.
IMHO this should depends on exam topics. For fundamental priciples this
period may be prologued up to 3 (or even 4) years total.
> 2) OS specifics. That's a tough one. We're all BSD, but we differ
> slightly in the ways we do things, so there should be a module that
> tests the knowledge of the differences between the major three BSD
> systems. Perhaps not so much the memorization of equivalent commands
> but rather the ability to adapt the knowledge gathered in one
> environment to another? You can fast-forward if I'm taking nonsense here.
The differences inbetween xBSDs is a cause why so many systems existent
(^& Thus we can't avoid this difference. Possible some tests should have
a modules, while other should be totally differ.
> 3) Q & A vs. test-labs. I'd vote against automated Q & A tests. I'd go
> for a series of test sessions that judge the ability to handle specific
> tasks. The candidate ought to be given a challenge, e.g. to configure a
> certain type of a firewall setup and then monitor it and write a report.
This is a question of ballance. While test-labs provides more
comprehensive and adequate testing, Q&A sets is easy to implement and
pass. We can combine both: first, theoreticall questions; next,
practice. On the other hand, Q&A results may be verified by any people
who have a master copy, but practical test must be checked by
expirienced human on prepared evaluation model and thus cannot be passed
at just any test-center.
> 4) Target level. I'd go after the Tillman's "low-to-middle" category of
> people who want a certificate because they need it to get a job. They
> will be more motivated to go into the trouble of certifying their skills.
Average BSD user is fairly knowledgable. So test must be directed to
people who knows how to exit from vi(1).
> 5) BSD OS vs. BSD technology certification. That begs for a separate
> treatment, so perhaps the certification ought to have three levels:
[snip]
Hmm... This seems quite similar to (2).
--
Best wishes,
Mishka.
_______________________________________________
BSDcert mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/bsdcert
