Timeline for Follow-Up 2: New Site Name and Scope Proposals
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 9, 2016 at 21:01 | comment | added | Jerry101 | @Goose that tagline relies on understanding the term "SDLC" which has two interpretations (even on that one Wikipedia page), one of them being the disastrous old Waterfall model. Worse, the term and tagline won't steer people away (to SO) for questions about programming in the small, in part because the term "software engineering" is too easily thought of as just "building software" rather than "engineering a success." I added a draft 3 tagline. | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 20:46 | history | edited | Jerry101 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Added draft 3 tag line and site name, responding to feedback |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 20:45 | comment | added | Goose | @Jerry101 I thought the Tagline Thomas posted in the original post is perfect. Longer taglines are more clear, but as far as tweet length goes, I think it's as good as I can imagine and I don't see any issues with it. | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 20:26 | comment | added | Jerry101 | @goose please do propose a better tag line. My aim in this answer is to iterate on how to convey the site's scope (and to make the case against doing it with "SDLC"). Considering ricksmt's point, we haven't yet found a way that's understandable to people asking questions about programming in the small rather with teams, requirements to meet, and qualities to achieve. Maybe I'll take another crack at it. For simple length, I'd happily cut out "for professionals, academics, and students in software development who are interested in getting expert answers" since that doesn't rule out anything. | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 19:12 | comment | added | Goose | Your tag lines are simply too long. | |
| Aug 28, 2016 at 1:03 | history | edited | Jerry101 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 296 characters in body |
| Aug 27, 2016 at 23:03 | history | edited | Jerry101 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 114 characters in body |
| Aug 27, 2016 at 23:01 | comment | added | Jerry101 | ThomasOwens tagline adopted, thanks. @gnat, added pgfs 2-4 et al to answer your questions. I'm fine with an explicit "not for code troubleshooting" even if it's redundant. | |
| Aug 27, 2016 at 22:57 | history | edited | Jerry101 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | adopt @ThomasOwen's reformatted tagline; added pgfs 2-4 to answer @gnat's comments |
| Aug 27, 2016 at 13:35 | comment | added | gnat | ...per my reading the change you suggest to tagline removes explicit prohibition of code troubleshooting. Consider editing to clarify why you think such removal is worth considering | |
| Aug 27, 2016 at 13:34 | comment | added | gnat | past experience over here rather strongly suggests that word "Software" in site name will suffice to prevent broadening scope to non-software system. Would be helpful if you edit to explain why you believe that there is a risk of such a broadening. As for tagline... | |
| Aug 27, 2016 at 13:01 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | If I turned it into the same format as the current tagline, I think the equivalent would be Software Engineering Stack Exchange is a Q&A site for professionals, academics, and students in software development and related fields who are interested in getting expert answers about applying principles to building software systems and achieving quality attributes such as performance, safety, reliability, usability, maintainaibility, and testability. | |
| Aug 26, 2016 at 22:24 | history | edited | Jerry101 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | deleted 4 characters in body |
| Aug 26, 2016 at 19:39 | history | answered | Jerry101 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |