On 5/25/07, Jeff Rush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > kirby urner wrote: > >> The part that makes me especially queasy is the CP4E section on pages > >> 10-11. I wish I had more to say there. It's fairly clear to those of > >> us who weren't there that there were some problems, but it's not > >> especially clear what they were or what we should learn from them. I'd > >> very much appreciate input from those who were actually there! > > > > Where is "there" exactly? > > From his email, "there" are those who were involved in the CP4E project and > who can tell us why it failed to reach fruition. I've never found a good > explanation myself, that didn't pull punches and told the story. >
My view is CP4E is alive and well, achieving results daily. > If we have the destination in common but do not agree on the path, we cannot > share the journey nor the burdens thereof and must say 'fare thee well'. > Our destination is pretty much everybody programs, a taken for granted skill, although "to program" means many things, doesn't imply mastery of Python. > > Lots of proprietary stuff goes on that we only learn about on > > edu-sig long after the fact -- and that's OK (not a problem). > > Sadly, these people miss out on a diversity of viewpoints, because they did > not share their problems. Perhaps that is their fear, that someone will solve > them but not in a way to their liking and without their aid. Better to keep > the problems. > > -Jeff It's not either/or. Today's software is a mix and the same people may do a lot of both. Kirby _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
