I like the idea. However, I have two reserve on the subject. First, who get to decide what level of certification/credential qualify a candidate for "Professional" level ? If this organization is done under the auspice of LPI, we will certainly be accused of favoritism. Not that it is a show-stopper, but this need to be thought out.
Second, where are we going to position this association ? Between the Linux Foundation internationally and local organization such as CLUE here in Canada, how much room is there left for an OSS Professional organization ? We will be competing with many other organization for mindshare and volunteer resources, so we need to come up a very enticing mission and focus to get any. I need to ponder the question further ... G. Matthew Rice wrote: > What do people think of the following idea: > > An 'add-on' idea has been floated around by a few people of making this > part of an "OSS Professional Association" with a code of ethics and > regional 'advocacy' groups organizing to raise the awareness of our > roles as true professionals amongst gov't bodies, trade organizations, etc. > > If this were to be set up, does anyone have strong opinions one way or > another on whether this should be an LPI focused group or a more inviting > group that is separate from LPI where you have two levels of "professional > association": > > OSS Professional > > At this level, people have the credentials of being a 'well rounded' > OSS professional. This is the full membership level where people with > LPIC-2 or higher, RHCE or higher, and other similarly credentialled > OSS professionals. > > OSS Professional "in training" > > This would be similar to what we do in Canada for graduates of engineering > schools that don't have all of the experience necessary for full licensure > as a professional engineer. This level is for people that want to show > that they are on the 'track' of becoming a professional but still have > some experience to gain. LPIC-1, RHCT and similar "entry-level" certs > would be required for this level. > > If you think this is a good idea, should there be another level for > unaccreditted "supporters/members" or should the "in training" level > allow anyone with the intent of proving and improving their competence? > > If you think this is a bad idea, please speak up, too. > > Regards, -- Etienne Goyer 0x3106BCC2 "For Bruce Schneier, SHA-1 is merely a compression algorithm." http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/164
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
