Re: [SystemSafety] qualification (of people) (was: Re: RE : Qualifying SW as "proven in use"

From: Steve Tockey < >
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 17:11:44 +0000

Chris,
I've been involved in an effort in the US to make "software engineering" licensable (in the same sense as "chartered" outside the US). In fact, there was a recent posting here with the subject line "Software exam gets low grade in first test" that talked about part of that same effort.

Of course, not every programmer would need to be licensed/chartered. But it would stand to reason that for software that can affect the "health, safety, and welfare of the general public" that someone should take liability--just like for civil engineering projects.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Hills <safetyyork_at_xxxxxx Organization: Phaedrus Systems
Date: Monday, July 1, 2013 2:14 AM
"systemsafety_at_xxxxxx <systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] qualification (of people) (was: Re: RE : Qualifying SW as "proven in use"  

-----Original Message-----
From: systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx [mailto:systemsafety-bounces_at_xxxxxx Thomas
Sent: 27 June 2013 16:53
To: systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Subject: [SystemSafety] qualification (was: Re: RE : Qualifying SW as "proven in use"

I recall that there are a few engineering standards that require that the chief engineer on a project is Chartered. That might be a good start ...

Martyn

[CAH] The problem is that for (for example)

The fitter fitting a Gas Boiler has to be Registered/Certified The electrician wiring up a Gas Boiler has to be Registered/Certified  The programmer writing the Sw to control the Gas Boiler has to be.... reasonably house trained?

The problem we had was due to Clive Sinclair. When he produced his zx80/81 Spectrum anyone who could copy type a program from the magazine into one of those home computers was "A Programmer" and it all went downhill from there.
Self taught enthusiasts with no processes and many bad programming habits.

This is why things like the Rasberry Pi is a bad thing as we will get a new generation of enthusiastic untrained people usually with a myriad of bad [programming] habits becoming Programmers.

If we start insisting that Senior SW Engineers and project leaders etc are Chartered things might change. Whilst there are a few unsuitable people who
are Chartered and a few good people will not make the Chartered when the changes are made over time it will improve things and the industry all together. I note that many countries are starting to look at Certifying/Registering Sw people particularly for safety related projects.

It will have to come. If not now when?

Regards
 Chris Hills

On 27/06/2013 12:35, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:
> Scenarios such as those Bertrand describes are not that far-fetched.
Unfortunately, there are in some places senior management who are in the same state of (lack of) expertise as Bertrand describes. That is a problem of professional qualification which I would prefer to treat as a separate issue.



The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Mon Jul 01 2013 - 19:11:58 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:05 CEST