I'm of the opinion that it's a perfectly good tag and should be kept. Here's why:
In the question What is a meta tag?, Both Robert and Gilles set forth some criteria. Here's Robert Cartaino's:
Proper tags describe what the question is about. "Meta tags" are things users add to describe other things like why the question was asked, or something that describes the author, or any other bit of meta information that doesn't actually describe what the question is about.
Meta tags label questions with things like beginner or fun or emergency. You can often identify a meta tag by asking yourself this question: "Is this question about the subject of {beginner}?" If the question doesn't make sense, it's most likely a meta tag.
If we apply that test to software-development, I think we find it works:
Is this question about the subject of software development?
Sounds pretty good.
Now let's try Gilles' criteria:
On Stack Exchange, a “meta tag” is a tag that does not carry any meaning. You should not use such tags, since they are meaningless.
Here is a “smell test” for tags:
- Can you objectively determine whether the tag does or does not apply to a given question?
- Can you say that a question is “about ”?
If the answer to these questions is no, you probably have a meta tag.
I would argue that we can objectively determine whether software-development applies to any question rather easily. I can also say that, for example, this question is certainly about software development.
If we want to add in other criteria for determining what is and what isn't a meta tag, we should do so now.