11–20 of 29 posts
To make it really open, would be better if the collection was stored as Github issues. Less shiny website but easier to add and no curation process (PRs may be refused, aka censored)
Not every open database should be on Github...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it is unreasonable to ask something like "What's your strategy for source control?" - not everyone uses git for everything and even if they do there is plenty to talk about.
Good point; the question could be, "What source control do you use?" Or ask about unit testing, CI, deployment, etc.
I get the theory, that good people ought to ask smart questions, but it feels trivially hackable the same way all those stupid brain teaser questions from '90s interview processes were. In other words, professional interviewees - the kind of people who memorise answer books, question lists, etc. - will outperform people who are smart and skilled but don't approach things in exactly the way the scoring checklist expects.
(Bonus points if you penalise people for not asking about something which was easily discoverable from Glassdoor, industry contacts or even your own company website.)
Perhaps drifting slightly OT, but this is a good example of why I'm not a fan of the current trend to make the "any questions for us?" section of interviews evaluative. I get the theory, that good people ought to ask smart questions, but it feels trivially hackable the same way all those stupid brain teaser questions from '90s interview processes were. In other words, professional interviewees - the kind of people wh…
If people who just memorize can outperform smart people, it just means that the one conducting the interview is not really smart, and so incapable of recognizing expertise.
To make it really open, would be better if the collection was stored as Github issues. Less shiny website but easier to add and no curation process (PRs may be refused, aka censored)
Not every open database should be on Github...
Their very first example question is "Do you use source control?", taken from a year 2000 post of Joel on Software. I think this is no longer a good question. (The answer will almost certainly be the affirmative, and the person asking it might sound unaware.)
I would expect something like a Creative Commons license to make it clear what can be reused and under which conditions.
It seems odd to me to call this "open source" when I can't find a statement of license or copyright on the site (maybe I missed it?). I would expect something like a Creative Commons license to make it clear what can be reused and under which conditions.
But yes, this should me more explicitly mentioned if they are advertising it as "open-source".