On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, 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
>
> Except it's a particular duty that nobody really likes to perform. Which
Kirrily Skud Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 p
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 10:00:50PM +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
> 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 w
> >Open Source Writers Group (http://oswg.org/) is a good starting point.
> >I'm subscribed to their mailing list. I can think of a couple of
other
> >good places to try, too, but they're a bit politically incorrect to
> >mention in this context :-/
>
> Who on earth would be considered poli
Kirrily Skud Robert wrote:
>
> Open Source Writers Group (http://oswg.org/) is a good starting point.
> I'm subscribed to their mailing list.
This is really cool. Should we consider posting an announcement to this
website for potential docs people? Or is it still premature to do
something like
At 04:29 PM 12/5/00 -0500, Kirrily Skud Robert wrote:
>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 pl
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
> > will have to do some proofreading (also tedious) no matter what. If
the
>
> Bah. *I* like proofreading. Certainly for typos and English
construction
> if I can forget everything other than the last 2 sentences I read.
Masters have no reason to spellcheck. I mean they'll have to proofread
> 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
>
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 expe
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
>
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 05:10:22PM +, David Grove wrote:
> Kirrily Skud Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Bah. *I* like documenting.
But what do you like documenting based on?
Uncommented code?
Code with comments?
Code with comments plus some level of skeletal documentation from the
pro
Documentation of Perl6 Internals, written by Apprentices and approved by
their Mentors -- that would be *excellent* :-)
- Original Message -
From: "Nathan Wiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Tech documentation (Re: Perl Apprenticeship Program)
.
. other (good) stuff ommi
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 huge criticism of the perldocs. That's not grunt work.
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>David Grove writes:
>> What does it take to be considered of "master" status in a certain area
>
>Basically this: if you're good at doing something and want/need
>someone to help with it, then you should be able to ask for an
>apprentice.
>
>I'd say n
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 11:28:31AM -0800, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> One thing that might be really cool is if there was a way to get some
> tech documentation apprentices on-board just to specialize in perldocs.
> For example, people out of school interested in tech documentation but
> needing somethi
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.
>
> Except it's a particular duty that nobody really likes to perform.
One thing that might be really cool is if ther
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
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 ra
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 ranked master there, but only in Perl, not perlguts. I've
proposed using the
David Grove writes:
> 3. We seem to be creating a class system. Nate, this is one that I can see
> as a must-be, so I'm not going in _that_ direction. But let's still
> consider ourselves equal, regardless of rank, ok? Otherwise, perl 6 is a
> wash, because it's just as much about community as it
On Wed, 31 Dec 1969, David Grove wrote:
> Ok, it sounds like a plan. Where do we start? By creating a registry of
> current tasks and masters, then fighting for apprenticeship?
I don't know. I've gotten a few good responses on the general idea and
process, but little-to-no feedback on the indivi
David Grove writes:
> What does it take to be considered of "master" status in a certain area
Basically this: if you're good at doing something and want/need
someone to help with it, then you should be able to ask for an
apprentice.
I'd say not to get too hung up on "master" and "apprentice", as
Today around 11:06am, David Grove hammered out this masterpiece:
: Does brainbench still have free tests for Perl? Maybe that's
: something to look into, and maybe since it's a purely volunteer
: effort if they are now charging for their perl tests, they might
: make an exception... I'll look int
"Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 1969, David Grove wrote:
> > In order to serve and assist future "apprentices" or maintainers, the
> > communication between the two should be public (unless private on
> > purpose), or somehow publicly available. Given the undesi
On Wed, 31 Dec 1969, David Grove wrote:
> In order to serve and assist future "apprentices" or maintainers, the
> communication between the two should be public (unless private on
> purpose), or somehow publicly available. Given the undesirability of
> having ten gazillion mailing lists, and likel
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 10:08:35PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> > Be available. Don't give a task, then disappear until its due,
accept
> it,
> > then disappear again. Answer questions. Check the work. Give
feedback.
>
> This is very
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 10:08:35PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> Be available. Don't give a task, then disappear until its due, accept it,
> then disappear again. Answer questions. Check the work. Give feedback.
This is very important IMHO; especially for apprentices that really
need some
[Replies to perl5-porters, because it's more immediate.]
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 11:00:06AM +0100, H . Merijn Brand wrote:
> Testing, plain.
> i.e. I'm now pretty involved in p5p, and cannot spare time for p6, though
> I'm following most of it. What I could offer is testing the `current state'
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 15:27:28 -0500, "Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apprentice Tasks
>
> Any task vaguely Perl related can be apprenticed out. Here is a sample
> list:
>
> - Documentation, both internal and external, including, for instance,
> programming guides, DDDs, user docum
for more on this apprenticeship concept in the software world, check out
http://www.mengwong.com/Apprenticeship/
it is a good read and the author is writing it with input from many
people.
the apprentice is given the shit work to do in return for being around
the master and learning directly h
> I am slightly worried about the "career path" dead-ending at personal
> lackey,
> however. But, hey, that's why we're getting paid the big bucks, right?
I do have some concerns, but before I express them, I have a sidetrack
comment in this direction.
I have been programming in Perl since befo
On Mon, 04 Dec 2000, Steve Fink wrote:
> One comment -- an apprenticeship is a two-sided relationship. Bryan, I
> think you've done a great job of describing the apprentice's
> responsibility to the master. But what about the master's responsibility
> to the apprentice? The apprentice is enteri
Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Dec 2000, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>
>> Nice. An apprentice is an administrative assistant with a career
>> path. If people are happy to do this, we'd be happy to use them. The
>> chairs proved weak at reporting on their list's activities (I know I
>> was)
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 06:29:47PM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Nice. An apprentice is an administrative assistant with a career
> path. If people are happy to do this, we'd be happy to use them. The
I like the idea too.
> chairs proved weak at reporting on their list's activities (I kno
On Mon, 04 Dec 2000, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Nice. An apprentice is an administrative assistant with a career
> path. If people are happy to do this, we'd be happy to use them. The
> chairs proved weak at reporting on their list's activities (I know I
> was) so being able to delegate that to
Nice. An apprentice is an administrative assistant with a career
path. If people are happy to do this, we'd be happy to use them. The
chairs proved weak at reporting on their list's activities (I know I
was) so being able to delegate that to someboy who wanted to do it and
help, would be good.
Hmmm, both long *and* late. Network outages are never a good thing.
This was promised this weekend, but I couldn't get it out. It's a
little long: actual ideas and proposals begin around "Perl Masters."
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The Perl Apprenticeship Program: Develo
38 matches
Mail list logo
