On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 19:00 +0100, david blanchard wrote: > Well this is bad news, as you can imagine. When there is an effort to > increase the pace of dev, losing you for 1,5 month is not the best thing > that could happen. > The one thing that I'm not very comfortable with is the short term notice > for this - I had in mind that you'd be implement the trust management and I > did not see this coming.
Yes :/ I understand that this was a sudden decision, as it's always difficult to know in advance if we are going to win a given contract, but it still raises two questions for me: - Wasn't there a way to warn in advance of the possibility that this could happen? Even a "this is really not for sure, but the company is trying to get a big contract, and if the company gets it it would mean that I would be available for 1.5 months". This would have helped a lot, even if at the end you didn't get the contract. - Even if we hadn't yet finalized the recurring contractor status (so there is a fault on David and I's side here, definitely), we are still on a long term relationship, with recurring work. So I'm wondering what made it more interesting to reassign you to this contract rather than privileging the long term relationship with Farsides. And I also have the same questions as David on a personal level, Vlad - are there parts of your work with Farsides that are unsatisfactory for you? Would be helpful to get your personal feelings. Xavier. _______________________________________________ Farsides mailing list - [email protected] Wiki: http://farsides.com/ List: http://farsides.com/ml/ Forum: http://farsides.com/forum/ Ideas: http://farsides.com/ideas/ Chat: http://farsides.com/chat/
