Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2022
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 12:58:51AM -0600, David Nicol wrote: > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 00:19 Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org> wrote: > > > > > No more warnings to *anyone* on this subject. > > > > I'm fine if the legacy list remains as part of the auto-generated one. I > have made the contributions I have made, with expectation of the glory of > credit. I very much doubt I am alone in that. Yes, really that's all the core can offer. Eternal glory, widely mirrored. Thanks for your contributions. (If I got this right, git counts 19 commits directly, but there are also messages with "based on", which in some ways are more telling - contributing to productive discussion) > And yes, my previous message was inappropriately over-the-top. I'm glad to hear it. Thanks for clarifying. I apologise also for being a bit grumpy in my reply. What you didn't know is that I'm currently (directly or indirectly) involved in two contracts/lawyers things. For the first - firm A writes code for firm B. This is good. Firm A wrote code for firm B's subsidiary firm C. This was good. Firm B sold firm C to firm D. A *year later*, firm D now has lawyers asking questions (to firm A, with whom they never had a contract) about details of the relationship and the code licensing and ownership, for reasons unknown. But the suspicion is that firm D is trying to void the sale, or something duplicitous, after using the code for a year. Which would be bad for firm A, as firm B are still good to work with. The other is negotiation with an third party, whom we need something from. It's been dragging out for weeks. I'm waiting for an update. "Soon". "You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think that it means" I'd love to tell them where to go shove their contract, but there's no point, as they wouldn't manage to deliver, even with two hands and a map. Nicholas ClarkThread Previous | Thread Next