Like the others before me have pointed out, do not give the source to them for integration. However, you do need to show them that your application works before they pay you.
You can setup a meeting where you show a loose integration working properly and assure them that you will fix any bugs they find within a period of 2-3 weeks (the time period depends on how big the application was). If possible, host the application somewhere and tell them the parameters, etc they can pass for various tasks. It is generally a good idea to have at least a VPS hosting for this. Always have everything in writing. It will save you and the client frustration later on. And, from my experience they don't care about the backend code and the libraries you use. They just care about the front end part of it. They don't want you releasing that source code all over the net and giving their competitors a chance to copy the code. I have written generic classes for DB access, caching, etc - for ease of programming. I use them for almost every project I do. However, if you think the client might have an issue with you doing that, then clear it with them. I really don't see how you can write DB class differently. There are only so many ways you can access it. You know what I mean? - Moazzam On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Jens Halm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> In my experience, in the US it's pretty standard for contracts to >> say that anything you as an employee/contractor write for the >> company becomes property of the company. > > I think if you are a good developer who regularly produces reusable > code you would run into serious problems if you regularly sign this > sort of contracts since it is really difficult to reinvent the > wheel all the time (I was never employed but at least for independent > consultants this is critical). With most projects I'm involved in I > don't care about 60%-90% of the code since it is highly coupled to the > problem domain of the client. But the remaining 10%-40% are reusable > and I need to be able to reuse them myself. I could happily do without > rights of use for those 60%-90%, but the problem is that contracts get > signed before development starts and it is usually impossible to > determine the reusable parts upfront. > > So in the end although I'm regularly presented with this sort of > clause that the client owns all the code in the initial version of the > contract I always negotiate to get it out (and succeeded in every > single case so far). The final terms were always unlimited rights of > use for both sides. If the client would not accept that I would > either abstain from the project or charge a significantly higher rate. > In most cases I consider this kind of clause inadequate anyway, since > the advantage for the client often is so marginal compared to the > disadvantage for the contractor. Often I'm part of a team and with > the rights of use for the small part of the application that I own I > couldn't just go and start selling the same project to other clients > anyway, and this, in most cases, is the only scenario the clients > usually (rightfully) want to protect themselves against. > > (Note that I'm living and working in Germany, don't know about the > situation in other countries). > > > Jens Halm > Spicefactory > > > _______________________________________________ > osflash mailing list > [email protected] > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
