Today around 11:55am, David Grove hammered out this masterpiece:
: Don't miss the point. I'm not proposing to look for masters using
: brainbench, but for viable apprentices that way. Basic Perl skill seems a
: certian criterium for candidacy, as would basic c skill for some areas.
: I've also
David Grove wrote:
Also, as far as documentation goes, I think it _should_ be written by
apprentices, so that non-masters can understand it too. That's always been
a huge criticism of the perldocs. That's not grunt work. That's proper
allocation of duties to the best suited personnel for the
Nathan Wiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Fink wrote:
David Grove wrote:
Anyways, that's just one suggestion. Do I have any idea where to find
these mythical people? No, unfortunately. Perhaps some feelers on
newsgroups might be a good place to start. Personal experience
B. The "master" / "apprentice" relationship is just that - it depends
how the people in question relate. As a potential "master" I am all
too aware that I am not skilled in teaching - usually because I
don't
know what is obvious vs what is obscure - so anyone "taught" by me
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 11:28:31AM -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
Anyways, that's just one suggestion. Do I have any idea where to find
these mythical people? No, unfortunately. Perhaps some feelers on
newsgroups might be a good place to start. Personal experience shows
that this could be a
Kirrily Skud Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 11:05:43AM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
David Grove wrote:
Also, as far as documentation goes, I think it _should_ be written
by
apprentices, so that non-masters can understand it too. That's
always
been
a
