A real serious question this:
A while back, I asked about 'titles' - http://geekswithblogs.net/peetm/posts/6795.aspx
And many thanks to those that replied – sadly though, there were too few to make many deductions.
Recently, I've starting chatting to one of the original Windows developers, and partly because what we've been chatting about, I'm starting to think very much about developers, and developing code (in general).
So, here's another related question, with a proviso … say you were going to write an operating-system (a decently complex one). Who would you want on the team?
The choices are up to you, but here are a few to consider perhaps:
- Fresh out of college graduates
- Software Engineers (with SE qualifications + experience)
- Computer Scientists (with CS qualifications + experience)
- Others – typically from a different background (accounting etc), and have 'changed trades'. May have experience
- Old Hands – no qualifications necessary (or with – doesn't matter?)
- …
You might want to stop here - I don't want to flavour or influence anyone's views!
Now, I work with all these 'types' (apart from 4 currently) to one degree or another, and whilst the Computer Scientists I work with can't really program (honest), they do know shit loads about algorithms, and new developments in the science etc.
Similarly, the SEs I work with know lots about building systems (and, as such, they're pretty experienced at creating them) – additionally, they seem to know a reasonable amount of CS – but not as much as CSs – however, they're not necessarily the best programmers I've ever worked with either!
The 'new kids' are keen – and are typically pretty-handy around code/compilers – and they're largely not afraid to take some risks. They'll put in the hours it takes, and are very keen to learn (Of course, they also know undergrad-level CS pretty well!). The same's somewhat true of those that fit into '4' above - additionally, these people have usually also developed other characteristics/skills/views that just might help!
Those in '5' might be accused (by me say) of being overly conservative – and yet, to be fair to them, they seem to have a good feel for what will eventually happen in a development!
Obviously, you'd love a mix! All the keenness of the newbie, plus all the experience, and knowledge of those in 2/3/4/5. BUT, you can't have that – you must pick from the list!
So, what ya going to do – if you 'mix' your team, what are the ratios you'd go for?
For anyone feeling particularly brave – would you go for young over old (or the reverse), would you go for females rather than males (or the reverse). If you have a view here, can you please say why.
If you'd rather answer in private, please email me your views at peet DOT morris @ gmail DOTTYTHING com