Talk:Software craftsmanship

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 March 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Software: Computing High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

"Software is the means by which all human effort can finally cease" - Software Evangelist Gifford Watkins.

The real craft of software programming lies in database structure. Creating from scratch every possible reoccuring human activity within an organization requires due diligence. Software is then becomes the rat's maze, created to channel individual desire toward the reward, and eliminating repetitive tasks. ==

I've made an edit to make this page more neutral and more about the facts of software craftsmanship: it's inspired by a fairly small set of books and it's also the title of one of these books. There's a potential conflict of interest since I'm the co-author of one of these books.Ade oshineye (talk) 08:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

It would be helpful, I think, if we had a section on the distinction between craftsmanship and engineering. Robert0122 (talk) 16:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

It certainly would. The article also needs to demonstrate that this is more than just a term which is preferred to "software engineering", and that Software Craftsmanship describes a coherent and consistent set of activities that are distinct from Software Engineering. Simply demonstrating that the term "Software Craftsmanship" has been used several times is not enough.--Michig (talk) 17:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Robertwharvey has called the notability of this page into question. Does anybody have any good reliable secondary sources that could be used to indicate the notability of software craftsmanship? Ade oshineye (talk) 23:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think notability has been sufficiently addressed in the article since this comment. References to several books, articles, and conferences have been included. - Michael (talk) 19:33, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. The article has been expanded considerably since the banner was added, and just looking at the set of references and links shows that the term is in widespread use. Banner now removed. -- Hymek (talk) 19:29, 22 February 2011 (UTC) (NB -- not watching page)Reply