Comments on: Programming Contract Work Tips Part 2 http://www.michikono.com/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/ Stuff only Michi cares to read Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:48:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: James http://www.michikono.com/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-14778 James Sat, 03 May 2008 17:34:34 +0000 http://michikono.com/blog/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-14778 Hi Michi, Thanks for your advice on how to handle contract work. I found your advice regarding estimates to be very helpful and have first-hand experience with the cost of underestimating a project. In regards to iterative development, I think it can be a very helpful way to manage change in a project; however, I still assert that there does need to be a specification and an in-stone list of features. To allow for change, each feature should have a breakdown of it's individual cost so that one feature can be removed or added and allow for changes in pricing. This protects both parties from the effects of change while still allowing for change. I haven't tested this theory yet, so I'll let you know how it goes! James Hi Michi,

Thanks for your advice on how to handle contract work. I found your advice regarding estimates to be very helpful and have first-hand experience with the cost of underestimating a project.

In regards to iterative development, I think it can be a very helpful way to manage change in a project; however, I still assert that there does need to be a specification and an in-stone list of features. To allow for change, each feature should have a breakdown of it’s individual cost so that one feature can be removed or added and allow for changes in pricing. This protects both parties from the effects of change while still allowing for change.

I haven’t tested this theory yet, so I’ll let you know how it goes!

James

]]> By: Michi http://www.michikono.com/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-502 Michi Tue, 06 Feb 2007 18:47:09 +0000 http://michikono.com/blog/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-502 bhaskar: I appreciate your feedback, but I think you misunderstand what the term "infect" means in the context it was used. I am referring to the fact that many of the most popular open source licenses force you to apply its license to your entire code base even if you are using it in a trivial portion of your code. In my post, I refer to the idea of using an open source library, but warn that if you use that library, your entire code may now become open source -- something your client may not want. Thus the term "infect," which I even put in quotes. The term was not an attack on open source. bhaskar: I appreciate your feedback, but I think you misunderstand what the term “infect” means in the context it was used. I am referring to the fact that many of the most popular open source licenses force you to apply its license to your entire code base even if you are using it in a trivial portion of your code. In my post, I refer to the idea of using an open source library, but warn that if you use that library, your entire code may now become open source — something your client may not want. Thus the term “infect,” which I even put in quotes. The term was not an attack on open source.

]]> By: bhaskar http://www.michikono.com/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-500 bhaskar Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:48:38 +0000 http://michikono.com/blog/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-500 I agree with you on most points. The only thing I found strange was you use of the term "infect", to refer to open source licenses. The fact of the matter is, if you want to use various open source licenses, in a place where things are going to be proprietary, then you have only once choice. Get sound legal advice from a lawyer that deals with IP related stuff. After that if the Open Source licenses allows you to do what you want to do, then by all means use it. If not, then don't use it, but don't claim that so and so license "infects" your code. No one is obligated to write Open source software for you, neither are they obligated to release it under terms that are favorable to you. Claiming a software license infects you code, is FUD, Microsoft style. I agree with you on most points.
The only thing I found strange was you use of the term “infect”, to refer to open source licenses.
The fact of the matter is, if you want to use various open source licenses, in a place where things are going to be proprietary, then you have only once choice.
Get sound legal advice from a lawyer that deals with IP related stuff. After that if the Open Source licenses allows you to do what you want to do, then by all means use it. If not, then don’t use it, but don’t claim that so and so license “infects” your code. No one is obligated to write Open source software for you, neither are they obligated to release it under terms that are favorable to you.
Claiming a software license infects you code, is FUD, Microsoft style.

]]> By: Website developers http://www.michikono.com/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-487 Website developers Tue, 06 Feb 2007 09:25:49 +0000 http://michikono.com/blog/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-487 All good points, especially the point about "partnering with designers'. It is true, since it is rare to find a good web developer (I mean web programmer) and is still rarer to find a good web developer who designs excellently. All good points, especially the point about “partnering with designers’. It is true, since it is rare to find a good web developer (I mean web programmer) and is still rarer to find a good web developer who designs excellently.

]]> By: Phil http://www.michikono.com/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-478 Phil Mon, 05 Feb 2007 17:55:34 +0000 http://michikono.com/blog/2007/02/05/programming-contract-work-tips-part-2/#comment-478 Good article. One nitpicky point is that you use the term "Intellectual Property" a fair bit. I think it would be helpful to use more specific terms like copyrights, patents, and trademarks since "Intellectual Property" is really vague. When you talk about it in specific terms, it is much clearer. Good article. One nitpicky point is that you use the term “Intellectual Property” a fair bit. I think it would be helpful to use more specific terms like copyrights, patents, and trademarks since “Intellectual Property” is really vague. When you talk about it in specific terms, it is much clearer.

]]>