Re: [tlug] [OT] Good IT Resume

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Josh Glover writes:

 > Well, this is another very good reason why people should not break
 > backwards compatibility unless absolutely necessary.

Curt's point and Ken's experience is that if the projects are as
independent as Darren's words suggest (to me, at any rate, I don't
know what he intended) breaking compatibility is inevitable.

People keep opposing modularization (control from within) and
standardization (control from without) as if they were perfect
substitutes.  They're not, they're mostly complementary *if* the
responsibilities can be divided up properly.

Note that the XP/agile/small is beautiful proponent was the one who
reacted most quickly and violently to Darren's statement, while Josh,
the Prince of Process (Take that, you cur!  DOCTOR, indeed) is
defending an advocate of extreme modularization.  This is not an
accident.