It was Apr 30 at 05:23PM when G. Matthew Rice wrote: > The most contentious issue being raised is whether these developer/dba > tracks should require the LPIC-1 or not. I contend that it should be > a requirement because I have seen many examples of developers deploying > solutions onto Linux systems and then leaving horrendous security holes > in their wake because they didn't understand basic Linux/Unix concepts > such as file permissions.
I have similar experiences. We see really good Java developers who come from a Microsoft environment being thrown in a *nix-centred surrounding. They understand their thing very well, as long as they can stay inside Eclipse (or any other IDE). As soon as they are confronted with file permissions, services, tomcat problems, etc... they fail miserably. Therefore, I am also favourable for having LPIC-1 being required for the developer track. > One of the counter arguments to this idea is that it creates a barrier to > entry for people that just want to prove that they have the developer skills. This could be solved by either making the LPIC-1 more ubiquitous. Make it dead cheap, or include it with the developer track exams. Otherwise, two separate certifications can be granted: developer or developer+LPIC-1, for example. In any way, I'm excited to see these new tracks being constructed! -- kind regards, Bart Van Loon What do you get when you cross a cantaloupe with lassie? A melon-collie baby! Get it?? HA HA HA OH OH HA HA! -- Calvin _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
