Search Results

Search found 1352 results on 55 pages for 'contract labor'.

Page 1/55 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Design by Contract with Microsoft .Net Code Contract

    - by Fredrik N
    I have done some talks on different events and summits about Defensive Programming and Design by Contract, last time was at Cornerstone’s Developer Summit 2010. Next time will be at SweNug (Sweden .Net User Group). I decided to write a blog post about of some stuffs I was talking about. Users are a terrible thing! Protect your self from them ”Human users have a gift for doing the worst possible thing at the worst possible time.” – Michael T. Nygard, Release It! The kind of users Michael T. Nygard are talking about is the users of a system. We also have users that uses our code, the users I’m going to focus on is the users of our code. Me and you and another developers. “Any fool can write code that a computer can understand. Good programmers write code that humans can understand.” – Martin Fowler Good programmers also writes code that humans know how to use, good programmers also make sure software behave in a predictable manner despise inputs or user actions. Design by Contract   Design by Contract (DbC) is a way for us to make a contract between us (the code writer) and the users of our code. It’s about “If you give me this, I promise to give you this”. It’s not about business validations, that is something completely different that should be part of the domain model. DbC is to make sure the users of our code uses it in a correct way, and that we can rely on the contract and write code in a way where we know that the users will follow the contract. It will make it much easier for us to write code with a contract specified. Something like the following code is something we may see often: public void DoSomething(Object value) { value.DoIKnowThatICanDoThis(); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Where “value” can be uses directly or passed to other methods and later be used. What some of us can easily forget here is that the “value” can be “null”. We will probably not passing a null value, but someone else that uses our code maybe will do it. I think most of you (including me) have passed “null” into a method because you don’t know if the argument need to be specified to a valid value etc. I bet most of you also have got the “Null reference exception”. Sometimes this “Null reference exception” can be hard and take time to fix, because we need to search among our code to see where the “null” value was passed in etc. Wouldn’t it be much better if we can as early as possible specify that the value can’t not be null, so the users of our code also know it when the users starts to use our code, and before run time execution of the code? This is where DbC comes into the picture. We can use DbC to specify what we need, and by doing so we can rely on the contract when we write our code. So the code above can actually use the DoIKnowThatICanDoThis() method on the value object without being worried that the “value” can be null. The contract between the users of the code and us writing the code, says that the “value” can’t be null.   Pre- and Postconditions   When working with DbC we are specifying pre- and postconditions.  Precondition is a condition that should be met before a query or command is executed. An example of a precondition is: “The Value argument of the method can’t be null”, and we make sure the “value” isn’t null before the method is called. Postcondition is a condition that should be met when a command or query is completed, a postcondition will make sure the result is correct. An example of a postconditon is “The method will return a list with at least 1 item”. Commands an Quires When using DbC, we need to know what a Command and a Query is, because some principles that can be good to follow are based on commands and queries. A Command is something that will not return anything, like the SQL’s CREATE, UPDATE and DELETE. There are two kinds of Commands when using DbC, the Creation commands (for example a Constructor), and Others. Others can for example be a Command to add a value to a list, remove or update a value etc. //Creation commands public Stack(int size) //Other commands public void Push(object value); public void Remove(); .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   A Query, is something that will return something, for example an Attribute, Property or a Function, like the SQL’s SELECT.   There are two kinds of Queries, the Basic Queries  (Quires that aren’t based on another queries), and the Derived Queries, queries that is based on another queries. Here is an example of queries of a Stack: //Basic Queries public int Count; public object this[int index] { get; } //Derived Queries //Is related to Count Query public bool IsEmpty() { return Count == 0; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } To understand about some principles that are good to follow when using DbC, we need to know about the Commands and different Queries. The 6 Principles When working with DbC, it’s advisable to follow some principles to make it easier to define and use contracts. The following DbC principles are: Separate commands and queries. Separate basic queries from derived queries. For each derived query, write a postcondition that specifies what result will be returned, in terms of one or more basic queries. For each command, write a postcondition that specifies the value of every basic query. For every query and command, decide on a suitable precondition. Write invariants to define unchanging properties of objects. Before I will write about each of them I want you to now that I’m going to use .Net 4.0 Code Contract. I will in the rest of the post uses a simple Stack (Yes I know, .Net already have a Stack class) to give you the basic understanding about using DbC. A Stack is a data structure where the first item in, will be the first item out. Here is a basic implementation of a Stack where not contract is specified yet: public class Stack { private object[] _array; //Basic Queries public uint Count; public object this[uint index] { get { return _array[index]; } set { _array[index] = value; } } //Derived Queries //Is related to Count Query public bool IsEmpty() { return Count == 0; } //Is related to Count and this[] Query public object Top() { return this[Count]; } //Creation commands public Stack(uint size) { Count = 0; _array = new object[size]; } //Other commands public void Push(object value) { this[++Count] = value; } public void Remove() { this[Count] = null; Count--; } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   Note: The Stack is implemented in a way to demonstrate the use of Code Contract in a simple way, the implementation may not look like how you would implement it, so don’t think this is the perfect Stack implementation, only used for demonstration.   Before I will go deeper into the principles I will simply mention how we can use the .Net Code Contract. I mention before about pre- and postcondition, is about “Require” something and to “Ensure” something. When using Code Contract, we will use a static class called “Contract” and is located in he “System.Diagnostics.Contracts” namespace. The contract must be specified at the top or our member statement block. To specify a precondition with Code Contract we uses the Contract.Requires method, and to specify a postcondition, we uses the Contract.Ensure method. Here is an example where both a pre- and postcondition are used: public object Top() { Contract.Requires(Count > 0, "Stack is empty"); Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<object>() == this[Count]); return this[Count]; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   The contract above requires that the Count is greater than 0, if not we can’t get the item at the Top of a Stack. We also Ensures that the results (By using the Contract.Result method, we can specify a postcondition that will check if the value returned from a method is correct) of the Top query is equal to this[Count].   1. Separate Commands and Queries   When working with DbC, it’s important to separate Command and Quires. A method should either be a command that performs an Action, or returning information to the caller, not both. By asking a question the answer shouldn’t be changed. The following is an example of a Command and a Query of a Stack: public void Push(object value) public object Top() .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   The Push is a command and will not return anything, just add a value to the Stack, the Top is a query to get the item at the top of the stack.   2. Separate basic queries from derived queries There are two different kinds of queries,  the basic queries that doesn’t rely on another queries, and derived queries that uses a basic query. The “Separate basic queries from derived queries” principle is about about that derived queries can be specified in terms of basic queries. So this principles is more about recognizing that a query is a derived query or a basic query. It will then make is much easier to follow the other principles. The following code shows a basic query and a derived query: //Basic Queries public uint Count; //Derived Queries //Is related to Count Query public bool IsEmpty() { return Count == 0; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   We can see that IsEmpty will use the Count query, and that makes the IsEmpty a Derived query.   3. For each derived query, write a postcondition that specifies what result will be returned, in terms of one or more basic queries.   When the derived query is recognize we can follow the 3ed principle. For each derived query, we can create a postcondition that specifies what result our derived query will return in terms of one or more basic queries. Remember that DbC is about contracts between the users of the code and us writing the code. So we can’t use demand that the users will pass in a valid value, we must also ensure that we will give the users what the users wants, when the user is following our contract. The IsEmpty query of the Stack will use a Count query and that will make the IsEmpty a Derived query, so we should now write a postcondition that specified what results will be returned, in terms of using a basic query and in this case the Count query, //Basic Queries public uint Count; //Derived Queries public bool IsEmpty() { Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<bool>() == (Count == 0)); return Count == 0; } The Contract.Ensures is used to create a postcondition. The above code will make sure that the results of the IsEmpty (by using the Contract.Result to get the result of the IsEmpty method) is correct, that will say that the IsEmpty will be either true or false based on Count is equal to 0 or not. The postcondition are using a basic query, so the IsEmpty is now following the 3ed principle. We also have another Derived Query, the Top query, it will also need a postcondition and it uses all basic queries. The Result of the Top method must be the same value as the this[] query returns. //Basic Queries public uint Count; public object this[uint index] { get { return _array[index]; } set { _array[index] = value; } } //Derived Queries //Is related to Count and this[] Query public object Top() { Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<object>() == this[Count]); return this[Count]; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   4. For each command, write a postcondition that specifies the value of every basic query.   For each command we will create a postconditon that specifies the value of basic queries. If we look at the Stack implementation we will have three Commands, one Creation command, the Constructor, and two others commands, Push and Remove. Those commands need a postcondition and they should include basic query to follow the 4th principle. //Creation commands public Stack(uint size) { Contract.Ensures(Count == 0); Count = 0; _array = new object[size]; } //Other commands public void Push(object value) { Contract.Ensures(Count == Contract.OldValue<uint>(Count) + 1); Contract.Ensures(this[Count] == value); this[++Count] = value; } public void Remove() { Contract.Ensures(Count == Contract.OldValue<uint>(Count) - 1); this[Count] = null; Count--; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   As you can see the Create command will Ensures that Count will be 0 when the Stack is created, when a Stack is created there shouldn’t be any items in the stack. The Push command will take a value and put it into the Stack, when an item is pushed into the Stack, the Count need to be increased to know the number of items added to the Stack, and we must also make sure the item is really added to the Stack. The postconditon of the Push method will make sure the that old value of the Count (by using the Contract.OldValue we can get the value a Query has before the method is called)  plus 1 will be equal to the Count query, this is the way we can ensure that the Push will increase the Count with one. We also make sure the this[] query will now contain the item we pushed into the Stack. The Remove method must make sure the Count is decreased by one when the top item is removed from the Stack. The Commands is now following the 4th principle, where each command now have a postcondition that used the value of basic queries. Note: The principle says every basic Query, the Remove only used one Query the Count, it’s because this command can’t use the this[] query because an item is removed, so the only way to make sure an item is removed is to just use the Count query, so the Remove will still follow the principle.   5. For every query and command, decide on a suitable precondition.   We have now focused only on postcondition, now time for some preconditons. The 5th principle is about deciding a suitable preconditon for every query and command. If we starts to look at one of our basic queries (will not go through all Queries and commands here, just some of them) the this[] query, we can’t pass an index that is lower then 1 (.Net arrays and list are zero based, but not the stack in this blog post ;)) and the index can’t be lesser than the number of items in the stack. So here we will need a preconditon. public object this[uint index] { get { Contract.Requires(index >= 1); Contract.Requires(index <= Count); return _array[index]; } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Think about the Contract as an documentation about how to use the code in a correct way, so if the contract could be specified elsewhere (not part of the method body), we could simply write “return _array[index]” and there is no need to check if index is greater or lesser than Count, because that is specified in a “contract”. The implementation of Code Contract, requires that the contract is specified in the code. As a developer I would rather have this contract elsewhere (Like Spec#) or implemented in a way Eiffel uses it as part of the language. Now when we have looked at one Query, we can also look at one command, the Remove command (You can see the whole implementation of the Stack at the end of this blog post, where precondition is added to more queries and commands then what I’m going to show in this section). We can only Remove an item if the Count is greater than 0. So we can write a precondition that will require that Count must be greater than 0. public void Remove() { Contract.Requires(Count > 0); Contract.Ensures(Count == Contract.OldValue<uint>(Count) - 1); this[Count] = null; Count--; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   6. Write invariants to define unchanging properties of objects.   The last principle is about making sure the object are feeling great! This is done by using invariants. When using Code Contract we can specify invariants by adding a method with the attribute ContractInvariantMethod, the method must be private or public and can only contains calls to Contract.Invariant. To make sure the Stack feels great, the Stack must have 0 or more items, the Count can’t never be a negative value to make sure each command and queries can be used of the Stack. Here is our invariant for the Stack object: [ContractInvariantMethod] private void ObjectInvariant() { Contract.Invariant(Count >= 0); } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   Note: The ObjectInvariant method will be called every time after a Query or Commands is called. Here is the full example using Code Contract:   public class Stack { private object[] _array; //Basic Queries public uint Count; public object this[uint index] { get { Contract.Requires(index >= 1); Contract.Requires(index <= Count); return _array[index]; } set { Contract.Requires(index >= 1); Contract.Requires(index <= Count); _array[index] = value; } } //Derived Queries //Is related to Count Query public bool IsEmpty() { Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<bool>() == (Count == 0)); return Count == 0; } //Is related to Count and this[] Query public object Top() { Contract.Requires(Count > 0, "Stack is empty"); Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<object>() == this[Count]); return this[Count]; } //Creation commands public Stack(uint size) { Contract.Requires(size > 0); Contract.Ensures(Count == 0); Count = 0; _array = new object[size]; } //Other commands public void Push(object value) { Contract.Requires(value != null); Contract.Ensures(Count == Contract.OldValue<uint>(Count) + 1); Contract.Ensures(this[Count] == value); this[++Count] = value; } public void Remove() { Contract.Requires(Count > 0); Contract.Ensures(Count == Contract.OldValue<uint>(Count) - 1); this[Count] = null; Count--; } [ContractInvariantMethod] private void ObjectInvariant() { Contract.Invariant(Count >= 0); } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } Summary By using Design By Contract we can make sure the users are using our code in a correct way, and we must also make sure the users will get the expected results when they uses our code. This can be done by specifying contracts. To make it easy to use Design By Contract, some principles may be good to follow like the separation of commands an queries. With .Net 4.0 we can use the Code Contract feature to specify contracts.

    Read the article

  • Finding the Right Solution to Source and Manage Your Contractors

    - by mark.rosenberg(at)oracle.com
    Many of our PeopleSoft Enterprise applications customers operate in service-based industries, and all of our customers have at least some internal service units, such as IT, marketing, and facilities. Employing the services of contractors, often referred to as "contingent labor," to deliver either or both internal and external services is common practice. As we've transitioned from an industrial age to a knowledge age, talent has become a primary competitive advantage for most organizations. Contingent labor offers talent on flexible terms; it offers the ability to scale up operations, close skill gaps, and manage risk in the process of delivering services. Talent comes from many sources and the rise in the contingent worker (contractor, consultant, temporary, part time) has increased significantly in the past decade and is expected to reach 40 percent in the next decade. Managing the total pool of talent in a seamless integrated fashion not only saves organizations money and increases efficiency, but creates a better place for workers of all kinds to work. Although the term "contingent labor" is frequently used to describe both contractors and employees who have flexible schedules and relationships with an organization, the remainder of this discussion focuses on contractors. The term "contingent labor" is used interchangeably with "contractor." Recognizing the importance of contingent labor, our PeopleSoft customers often ask our team, "What Oracle vendor management system (VMS) applications should I evaluate for managing contractors?" In response, I thought it would be useful to describe and compare the three most common Oracle-based options available to our customers. They are:   The enterprise licensed software model in which you implement and utilize the PeopleSoft Services Procurement (sPro) application and potentially other PeopleSoft applications;  The software-as-a-service model in which you gain access to a derivative of PeopleSoft sPro from an Oracle Business Process Outsourcing Partner; and  The managed service provider (MSP) model in which staffing industry professionals utilize either your enterprise licensed software or the software-as-a-service application to administer your contingent labor program. At this point, you may be asking yourself, "Why three options?" The answer is that since there is no "one size fits all" in terms of talent, there is also no "one size fits all" for effectively sourcing and managing contingent workers. Various factors influence how an organization thinks about and relates to its contractors, and each of the three Oracle-based options addresses an organization's needs and preferences differently. For the purposes of this discussion, I will describe the options with respect to (A) pricing and software provisioning models; (B) control and flexibility; (C) level of engagement with contractors; and (D) approach to sourcing, employment law, and financial settlement. Option 1:  Enterprise Licensed Software In this model, you purchase from Oracle the license and support for the applications you need. Typically, you license PeopleSoft sPro as your VMS tool for sourcing, monitoring, and paying your contract labor. In conjunction with sPro, you can also utilize PeopleSoft Human Capital Management (HCM) applications (if you do not already) to configure more advanced business processes for recruiting, training, and tracking your contractors. Many customers choose this enterprise license software model because of the functionality and natural integration of the PeopleSoft applications and because the cost for the PeopleSoft software is explicit. There is no fee per transaction to source each contractor under this model. Our customers that employ contractors to augment their permanent staff on billable client engagements often find this model appealing because there are no fees to affect their profit margins. With this model, you decide whether to have your own IT organization run the software or have the software hosted and managed by either Oracle or another application services provider. Your organization, perhaps with the assistance of consultants, configures, deploys, and operates the software for managing your contingent workforce. This model offers you the highest level of control and flexibility since your organization can configure the contractor process flow exactly to your business and security requirements and can extend the functionality with PeopleTools. This option has proven very valuable and applicable to our customers engaged in government contracting because their contingent labor management practices are subject to complex standards and regulations. Customers find a great deal of value in the application functionality and configurability the enterprise licensed software offers for managing contingent labor. Some examples of that functionality are... The ability to create a tiered network of preferred suppliers including competencies, pricing agreements, and elaborate candidate management capabilities. Configurable alerts and online collaboration for bid, resource requisition, timesheet, and deliverable entry, routing, and approval for both resource and deliverable-based services. The ability to manage contractors with the same PeopleSoft HCM and Projects applications that are used to manage the permanent workforce. Because it allows you to utilize much of the same PeopleSoft HCM and Projects application functionality for contractors that you use for permanent employees, the enterprise licensed software model supports the deepest level of engagement with the contingent workforce. For example, you can: fill job openings with contingent labor; guide contingent workers through essential safety and compliance training with PeopleSoft Enterprise Learning Management; and source contingent workers directly to project-based assignments in PeopleSoft Resource Management and PeopleSoft Program Management. This option enables contingent workers to collaborate closely with your permanent staff on complex, knowledge-based efforts - R&D projects, billable client contracts, architecture and engineering projects spanning multiple years, and so on. With the enterprise licensed software model, your organization maintains responsibility for the sourcing, onboarding (including adherence to employment laws), and financial settlement processes. This means your organization maintains on staff or hires the expertise in these domains to utilize the software and interact with suppliers and contractors. Option 2:  Software as a Service (SaaS) The effort involved in setting up and operating VMS software to handle a contingent workforce leads many organizations to seek a system that can be activated and configured within a few days and for which they can pay based on usage. Oracle's Business Process Outsourcing partner, Provade, Inc., provides exactly this option to our customers. Provade offers its vendor management software as a service over the Internet and usually charges your organization a fee that is a percentage of your total contingent labor spending processed through the Provade software. (Percentage of spend is the predominant fee model, although not the only one.) In addition to lower implementation costs, the effort of configuring and maintaining the software is largely upon Provade, not your organization. This can be very appealing to IT organizations that are thinly stretched supporting other important information technology initiatives. Built upon PeopleSoft sPro, the Provade solution is tailored for simple and quick deployment and administration. Provade has added capabilities to clone users rapidly and has simplified business documents, like work orders and change orders, to facilitate enterprise-wide, self-service adoption with little to no training. Provade also leverages Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) to provide integrated spend analytics and dashboards. Although pure customization is more limited than with the enterprise licensed software model, Provade offers a very effective option for organizations that are regularly on-boarding and off-boarding high volumes of contingent staff hired to perform discrete support tasks (for example, order fulfillment during the holiday season, hourly clerical work, desktop technology repairs, and so on) or project tasks. The software is very configurable and at the same time very intuitive to even the most computer-phobic users. The level of contingent worker engagement your organization can achieve with the Provade option is generally the same as with the enterprise licensed software model since Provade can automatically establish contingent labor resources in your PeopleSoft applications. Provade has pre-built integrations to Oracle's PeopleSoft and the Oracle E-Business Suite procurement, projects, payables, and HCM applications, so that you can evaluate, train, assign, and track contingent workers like your permanent employees. Similar to the enterprise licensed software model, your organization is responsible for the contingent worker sourcing, administration, and financial settlement processes. This means your organization needs to maintain the staff expertise in these domains. Option 3:  Managed Services Provider (MSP) Whether you are using the enterprise licensed model or the SaaS model, you may want to engage the services of sourcing, employment, payroll, and financial settlement professionals to administer your contingent workforce program. Firms that offer this expertise are often referred to as "MSPs," and they are typically staffing companies that also offer permanent and temporary hiring services. (In fact, many of the major MSPs are Oracle applications customers themselves, and they utilize the PeopleSoft Solution for the Staffing Industry to run their own business operations.) Usually, MSPs place their staff on-site at your facilities, and they can utilize either your enterprise licensed PeopleSoft sPro application or the Provade VMS SaaS software to administer the network of suppliers providing contingent workers. When you utilize an MSP, there is a separate fee for the MSP's service that is typically funded by the participating suppliers of the contingent labor. Also in this model, the suppliers of the contingent labor (not the MSP) usually pay the contingent labor force. With an MSP, you are intentionally turning over business process control for the advantages associated with having someone else manage the processes. The software option you choose will to a certain extent affect your process flexibility; however, the MSPs are often able to adapt their processes to the unique demands of your business. When you engage an MSP, you will want to give some thought to the level of engagement and "partnering" you need with your contingent workforce. Because the MSP acts as an intermediary, it can be very valuable in handling high volume, routine contracting for which there is a relatively low need for "partnering" with the contingent workforce. However, if your organization (or part of your organization) engages contingent workers for high-profile client projects that require diplomacy, intensive amounts of interaction, and personal trust, introducing an MSP into the process may prove less effective than handling the process with your own staff. In fact, in many organizations, it is common to enlist an MSP to handle contractors working on internal projects and to have permanent employees handle the contractor relationships that affect the portion of the services portfolio focused on customer-facing, billable projects. One of the key advantages of enlisting an MSP is that you do not have to maintain the expertise required for orchestrating the sourcing, hiring, and paying of contingent workers.  These are the domain of the MSPs. If your own staff members are not prepared to manage the essential "overhead" processes associated with contingent labor, working with an MSP can make solid business sense. Proper administration of a contingent workforce can make the difference between project success and failure, operating profit and loss, and legal compliance and fines. Concluding Thoughts There is little doubt that thoughtfully and purposefully constructing a service delivery strategy that leverages the strengths of contingent workers can lead to better projects, deliverables, and business results. What requires a bit more thinking is determining the platform (or platforms) that will enable each part of your organization to best deliver on its mission.

    Read the article

  • Project Manager that wants to lock in time estimate with a signed contract

    - by sunpech
    At a previous employment, a project manager (PM) wasn't satisfied with the delivery time of the code on a project I was on. I was told by my project lead that that the PM was considering having me sign a contract to lock-in my time estimates I gave for tasks and delivery dates. The situation on the project was that we were working with new technologies, codebase, coding standards, and very prone-to-change requirements. I was learning new things and applying them the best I could on requirements that kept on changing. The requirements throughout the iterations grew by 2-3 times, with my estimate-to-complete growing by roughly 5-8 times. The only things that didn't change were the estimates and delivery dates. Yes, I did end up missing most deadlines. And I was working on some very new technologies that no one else on the entire development team could really help out on because they wouldn't be familiar with it. At least not easily. It seemed to me then, that the PM wanted his numbers to add up-- and thus wanted me to sign a contract to "ensure" that I would always deliver working code on time. I suppose with a signed contract the PM could use it against me if I couldn't deliver on time. I believe what happened next was that other project managers and/or project leads defended me, and didn't let this happen. My question is, should this raise a red flag about the manager? Is it common practice for a manager to lock-in time estimates of a software developer with a signed contract? Or in this case, try to. Please note, I was a full time employee, not an independent consultant. Update: I want to add that I did give new estimates weekly, but it seems the original estimates and delivery dates were what the PM was fixated on.

    Read the article

  • Scheme of work contract

    - by Tommy
    I'm in the process of setting up a (one man) company and got to a item on my list "contracts and insurance". I will primary be offering custom software development but may also offer some "open source solutions", install, configure / manage e.t.c. I'm not sure how to approach a contract with a potential customer. I want to be flexible and offer the customer rights over the product (when not using open source of course) but I obviously want / need to be able to reuse code, already written and any future work. Is this possible or is it just something that people do but strictly they shouldn't? Is there a standard freelancing / contacting developer agreement? Going to a lawyer I'm sure is an answer but a very expensive one! If not do you end up with a fresh contract with each job / client and lots of trips to solicitors?

    Read the article

  • *New Movie* featuring AutoVue value in Primavera Contract Management

    - by prasenjit.niyogi(at)oracle.com
    With the Oscar season approaching fast, one movie that you woudn't want to miss is the latest release from our post-production studios. Check out the new demo movie featuring the joint value of AutoVue's enterprise visualization within Primavera Contract Management. Please feel free share it with your partners, customers and prosepects. The video can be found on O.com (here), or on AutoVue's YouTube channel (here) or by simply clicking on the image below

    Read the article

  • Valid reason for employer to breach freelance contract

    - by Costas
    Please don't close this as offtopic. According to the FAQ I can post programming related questions. I was working on a project and when it was half way completed (1 weeks work), the employer backs out and refuses to pay me. Shortly before this he was being very rude. He was having problems configuring the server and he told me it was my fault and that I had to fix it. After I spent several hours trying to figure out the problem, it turned out to be his fault. After this when I put the code on the server. He found 1 bug that I had missed. He freaked out, accused me of being a bad programmer and told me that the code was shit and that he couldn't use it. He said that if there is a bug in the code, that means the code is bad and he can't use it. He would have to throw the code away and hire someone else. His kept reiterating his argument: "why should I pay for code that I can't use". And I kept telling him the code was fine and urged him to have another programmer give him a second opinion. But he would have none of that. He said he would compensate me for my troubles by paying me 250$. Then he changes his mind and lowers that to 200$. Then a third time he changes his mind and says he doesn't want to compensate me at all. I'm left frustrated because besides being rude, he did not at any time tell me he was unhappy with the work that I was doing. So my question is; Is the above a valid reason to back out of a verbal contract in your opinion?

    Read the article

  • Compensation advice on overseas contract with former employer [closed]

    - by user64248
    I work as a full time developer in the US. My previous employer from 3 years ago has sold a large startup project in Russia for next month, however their three and only senior developers have recently resigned. I still have somewhat intricate knowledge of the software to be installed since I was the original author, so my former employer, in somewhat of a panic, has asked if I can take two weeks vacation from my current job to fly to Russia and lead the startup. Logistically, I can do this and my current employer agreed without issue. Said former employer is very small and hasn't hired contractors before, and I haven't contracted either. The company simply asked my what my salary requirements are. I had, and still have, a great professional relationship with the owners. I feel like I'm doing this as a favor in a way. Payment is guaranteed, but I have no idea what I should bill for overseas work. If it matters, I was paid around 110k at the former employer. Just looking for some advice. There are many contracting salary threads here, but I feel that the overseas work throws a twist in things. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • 5 Things I Learned About the IT Labor Shortage

    - by Oracle Accelerate for Midsize Companies
    by Jim Lein | Sr. Principal Product Marketing Director | Oracle Midsize Programs | @JimLein Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} 5 Things I Learned About the IT Labor Shortage A gentle autumn breeze is nudging the last golden leaves off the aspen trees. It’s time to wrap up the series that I started back in April, “The Growing IT Labor Shortage: Are You Feeling It?” Even in a time of relatively high unemployment, labor shortages exist depending on many factors, including location, industry, IT requirements, and company size. According to Manpower Groups 2013 Talent Shortage Survey, 35% of hiring managers globally are having difficulty filling jobs. Their top three challenges in filling jobs are: 1. lack of technical competencies (hard skills) 2. Lack of available applicants 3. Lack of experience The same report listed Technicians as the most difficult position to fill in the United States For most companies, Human Capital and Talent Management have never been more strategic and they are striving for ways streamline processes, reduce turnover, and lower costs (see this Oracle whitepaper, “ Simplify Workforce Management and Increase Global Agility”). Everyone I spoke to—partner, customer, and Oracle experts—agreed that it can be extremely challenging to hire and retain IT talent in today’s labor market. And they generally agreed on the causes: a. IT is so pervasive that there are myriad moving parts requiring support and expertise, b. thus, it’s hard for university graduates to step in and contribute immediately without experience and specialization, c. big IT companies generally aren’t the talent incubators that they were in the freewheeling 90’s due to bottom line pressures that require hiring talent that can hit the ground running, and d. it’s often too expensive for resource-strapped midsize companies to invest the time and money required to get graduates up to speed. Here are my top lessons learned from my conversations with the experts. 1. A Better Title Would Have Been, “The Challenges of Finding and Retaining IT Talent That Matches Your Requirements” There are more applicants than jobs but it’s getting tougher and tougher to find individuals that perfectly fit each and every role. Top performing companies are increasingly looking to hire the “almost ready”, striving to keep their existing talent more engaged, and leveraging their employee’s social and professional networks to quickly narrow down candidate searches (here’s another whitepaper, “A Strategic Approach to Talent Management”). 2. Size Matters—But So Does Location Midsize companies must strive to build cultures that compete favorably with what large enterprises can offer, especially when they aren’t within commuting distance of IT talent strongholds. They can’t always match the compensation and benefits offered by large enterprises so it's paramount to offer candidates high quality of life and opportunities to build their resumes in alignment with their long term career aspirations. 3. Get By With a Little Help From Your Friends It doesn’t always make sense to invest time and money in training an employee on a task they will not perform frequently. Or get in a bidding war for talent with skills that are rare and in high demand. Many midsize companies are finding that it makes good economic sense to contract with partners for remote support rather than trying to divvy up each and every role amongst their lean staff. Internal staff can be assigned to roles that will have the highest positive impact on achieving organizational goals. 4. It’s Actually Both “What You Know” AND “Who You Know” If I was hiring someone today I would absolutely leverage the social and professional networks of my co-workers. Period. Most research shows that hiring in this manner is less expensive and time consuming AND produces better results. There is also some evidence that suggests new hires from employees’ networks have higher job performance and retention rates. 5. I Have New Respect for Recruiters and Hiring Managers My hats off to them—it’s not easy hiring and retaining top talent with today’s challenges. Check out the infographic, “A New Day: Taking HR from Chaos to Control”, on Oracle’s Human Capital Management solutions home page. You can also explore all of Oracle’s HCM solutions from that page based on your role. You can read all the posts in this series by clicking on the links in the right sidebar. Stay tuned…we’ll continue to post thought leadership on HCM and Talent Management topics.

    Read the article

  • Buy iPhone 4 Without Contract: $599 (AT&T) and $699 (Verizon)

    - by Gopinath
    Purchasing iPhone without a contract is a good option when you are planning to gift it to someone or going to use it outside US. Both AT&T and Verizon lets you iPhone 4 without a contract but this information is buried deep under blurred text in FAQs and agreements.  Here is the pricing information of AT&T and Verizon iPhone 4 without contract AT&T iPhone 4 16 GB without contract – $599.99 AT&T iPhone 4 32 GB without contract – $699.99 Verizon iPhone 4 16 GB without contract – $649.99 Verizon iPhone 4 32 GB without contract – $749.99 This information is seen on the bottom of Apple’s iPhone purchase page and on Verizon’s frequently asked questions about the iPhone 4 page. Screenshots embedded below I live in India and I’m happy to know the price at which  I can buy an authentic iPhone 4 without contract . Now I can ask my friends to gift an iPhone 4 for me iphone cc image credit: flickr/williamhook This article titled,Buy iPhone 4 Without Contract: $599 (AT&T) and $699 (Verizon), was originally published at Tech Dreams. Grab our rss feed or fan us on Facebook to get updates from us.

    Read the article

  • On contract work, obligations to said contract, and looking out for yourself…

    - by jlnorsworthy
    Without boring you all with details, my last two contract assignments were cut short; I was given 3 days notice on one, and 4 weeks notice on the other. Neither of these were due to performance – they both basically came down budget issues. On my second contract, I got the feeling that I may not have been a great place to stay for the duration of my contract. Because of money/time spent getting me in the door, and the possible negative effect of my employer/recruiter, I decided to stay at least for a few months (and start looking several weeks before the end of my supposedly “extendable” contract). These experiences have left me a little wary of contract work. It seems that if I land a bad contract, that my recruiter would take a hit (reputation or otherwise) if I quickly found another job. But on the other hand, the client company won’t think twice of ending the contract early for any reason. I know that the counter argument to this is “maybe your recruiter shouldn’t have put you into a crappy assignment”… either way, it seems that since I am relying on him to provide me with work, that I should try to not damage his reputation with client companies. I’m basically brand new to contracting (these were my first two contracts) so these concerns are new to me. TLDR: Is contract work, by its very nature, largely unstable? Am I worried too much about my recruiter? Should I be quicker to start looking for a new job even after just weeks at a new company (when the environment seems unstable)? If so, do I look through my recruiter or just find another position by any means necessary?

    Read the article

  • Estimating cost of labor for a controlled experiment

    - by Lorin Hochstein
    Let's say you are a software engineering researcher and you are designing a controlled experiment to compare two software technologies or techniques (e.g., TDD vs. non-TDD, Python vs. Go) with respect to some qualities of interest (e.g., quality of resulting code, programmer productivity). According to your study design, participants will work alone to implement a non-trivial software system. You estimate it should take about six months for a single programmer to complete the task. You also estimate via power analysis that you will need around sixty study participants to obtain statistically significant results, assuming the technologies actually do yield different outcomes. To maximize external validity, you want to use professional programmers as study participants. Unfortunately, it isn't possible to find professional programmers who can volunteer for several months to work full-time on implementing a software system. You decide to go the simplest route and contract with a large IT consulting firm to obtain access to programmers to participate in the study. What is a reasonable estimate of the cost range, per person-month, for the programming labor? Assume you are constrained to work with a U.S.-based firm, but it doesn't matter where in the U.S. the firm itself or the programmers or located. Note: I'm looking for a reasonable order-of-magnitude range suitable for back-of-the-envelope calculations so that when people say "Why doesn't somebody just do a study to measure X", I can say, "Because running that study properly would cost $Y", and have a reasonable argument for the value of $Y.

    Read the article

  • Why is design by contract considered an alternative to the pseudo programming process?

    - by zoopp
    Right now I'm reading Code Complete by Steve McConnell and in chapter 9 he talks about the Pseudo Programming Process (PPP). From what I've understood, the PPP is a way of programming in which the programmer first writes the pseudo code for the routine he's working on, then refines it up to the point where pretty much each pseudo code line can be implemented in 1-3 lines of code, then writes the code in the designated programming language and finally the pseudo code is saved as comments for the purpose of documenting the routine. In chapter 9.4 the author mentions alternatives to the PPP, one of which is 'design by contract'. In design by contract you basically assert preconditions and postconditions of each routine. Now why would that be considered an alternative? To me it seems obvious that I should use both techniques at the same time and not chose one over the other.

    Read the article

  • Is it common to purchase an insurance policy for contract development work?

    - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt
    I am not sure if this is the best place for the question, but I am not sure where else to ask. Background I am a contract developer and have just been asked to provide a general liability policy for my next gig. In 6-7 years this has never been asked of me. Question Is this common? If so, can anyone recommend a good underwriter that focuses on what we do as contract software developers? I realize that Google could help me find underwriters but it won't give me unbiased public opinion about which companies actually understand what we do and factor that into the price of the policy. Thanks, Matt

    Read the article

  • Contract / Project / Line-Item hierarchy design considerations

    - by Ryan
    We currently have an application that allows users to create a Contract. A contract can have 1 or more Project. A project can have 0 or more sub-projects (which can have their own sub-projects, and so on) as well as 1 or more Line. Lines can have any number of sub-lines (which can have their own sub-lines, and so on). Currently, our design contains circular references, and I'd like to get away from that. Currently, it looks a bit like this: public class Contract { public List<Project> Projects { get; set; } } public class Project { public Contract OwningContract { get; set; } public Project ParentProject { get; set; } public List<Project> SubProjects { get; set; } public List<Line> Lines { get; set; } } public class Line { public Project OwningProject { get; set; } public List ParentLine { get; set; } public List<Line> SubLines { get; set; } } We're using the M-V-VM "pattern" and use these Models (and their associated view models) to populate a large "edit" screen where users can modify their contracts and the properties on all of the objects. Where things start to get confusing for me is when we add, for example, a Cost property to the Line. The issue is reflecting at the highest level (the contract) changes made to the lowest level. Looking for some thoughts as to how to change this design to remove the circular references. One thought I had was that the contract would have a Dictionary<Guid, Project> which would contain ALL projects (regardless of their level in hierarchy). The Project would then have a Guid property called "Parent" which could be used to search the contract's dictionary for the parent object. THe same logic could be applied at the Line level. Thanks! Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Contract Programming - Deposit % and Payment Methods? Any advice is appreciated

    - by Rick
    I'm pretty new to doing contract work and finally landed a decent paying project. The guy actually offered to put down a deposit and I'm just wondering what percentage I should consider asking for. I was thinking around 25% since its not a terribly large project (only about 20 hours). Also, I can't use PayPal (have had a terrible experience with them freezing funds for no good reason) so I'm wondering if anyone can suggest other methods for the client to send the deposit / payment. I want to make it as easy as possible for them.. thanks for any advice

    Read the article

  • How are design-by-contract and property-based testing (QuickCheck) related?

    - by Todd Owen
    Is their only similarity the fact that they are not xUnit (or more precisely, not based on enumerating specific test cases), or is it deeper than that? Property-based testing (using QuickCheck, ScalaCheck, etc) seem well-suited to a functional programming style where side-effects are avoided. On the other hand, Design by Contract (as implemented in Eiffel) is more suited to OOP languages: you can express post-conditions about the effects of methods, not just their return values. But both of them involve testing assertions that are true in general (rather than assertions that should be true for a specific test case). And both can be tested using randomly generated inputs (with QuickCheck this is the only way, whereas with Eiffel I believe it is an optional feature of the AutoTest tool). Is there an umbrella term to encompass both approaches? Or am I imagining a relationship that doesn't really exist.

    Read the article

  • Penalty clause on programming contract

    - by Everyone
    I am considering the move to the other side of development, as a contract programmer. SO has given me a good few hints on the kind of figures to quote ( and why ), and a few points to bear in mind such as Non-competition and [IP Protection] Having worked as a programmer for a while, I know that a few reasons for deadline delays may be - Estimates can be all over the place both from the Contractor, and the Job provider Things like bandwidth bottlenecks, merge for high-impact code etc Clarification time on provided requirements... etc If you have worked as a contract programmer then How frequently do you encounter a penalty/forfeit clause in your agreement? What do you deem unacceptable in the penalty/forfeit clause?

    Read the article

  • I'm a contract developer and I think I'm about to get screwed [closed]

    - by kagaku
    I do contract development on the side. You could say that I'm a contract developer? Considering I've only ever had one client I'd say that's not exactly the truth - more like I took a side job and needed some extra cash. It started out as a "rebuild our website and we'll pay you $10k" type project. Once that was complete (a bit over schedule, but certainly not over budget), the company hired me on as a "long term support" contractor. The contract is to go from March of this year, expiring on December 31st of this year - 10 months. Over which a payment is to be paid on the 30th of each month for a set amount. I've been fulfilling my end of the contract on all points - doing server maintenence, application and database changes, doing huge rush changes and pretty much just going above and beyond. Currently I'm in the middle of development of an iPhone mobile application (PhoneGap based) which is nearing completion (probably 3-4 weeks from submission). It has not been all peaches and flowers though. Each and every month when my paycheck comes due, there always seems to be an issue of sorts. These issues did not occur during the initial project, only during the support contract. The actual contract states that my check should be mailed out on the 30th of the month. I have received my check on time approximately once (on time being about 2-3 days within the 30th). I've received my paycheck as late as the 15th of the next month - over two weeks late. I've put up with it because I need the paycheck. There have been promises and promises of "we'll send it out on time next time! I promise" - only to receive it just as late the next month. When I ask about payment they give me a vibe like "why are you only worried about money?" - unfortunately I don't have the luxury of not worrying about money. The last straw was with my August payment, which should have been mailed on August 30th. I received it on September 12th. The reason for the delay? "USPS is delaying it man! we sent it out on the 1st!" is the reason I got. When I finally got the check in the mail, the postage on the envelope was marked September 10th - the date it was run through the postage machine. I've been outright lied to, at this point. I carry on working, because again - I need a paycheck. I orchestrated the move of our application to a new server, developed a bunch of new changes and continued work on the iPhone app. All told I probably went over my hourly allotment (I'm paid for 40 hours a month, I probably put in at least 50). On Saturday, the 1st, I gave the main contact at the company (a company of 3, by the way - this is not some big corporation) a ring and filled him in on the status of my work for the past two weeks. Unusually I hadn't heard from him since the middle of September. His response was "oh... well, that is nice and uh.. good job. well, we've been talking within the company about things and we've certainly got some decisions ahead of us..." - not verbatim but you get the idea (I hope?). I got out of this conversation that the site is not doing very well (which it's not) and they're considering pulling the plug. Crap, this contract is going to end early - there goes Christmas! Fine, that's alright, no problem. I'll get paid for the last months work and call it a day. Unfortunately I still haven't gotten last months check, and I'm getting dicked around now. "Oh.. we had problems transferring funds, we'll try and mail it out tomorrow" and "I left a VM with the finance guy, but I can't get ahold of him". So I'm getting the feeling I'm not getting paid for all the work I put in for September. This is obviously breach of contract, and I am pissed. Thinking irrationally, I considered changing all their passwords and holding their stuff hostage. Before I think it through (by the way, I am NOT going to do this, realized it would probably get me in trouble), I go and try some passwords for our various accounts. Google Apps? Oh, I'm no longer administrator here. Godaddy? Whoops, invalid password. Disqus? Nope, invalid password here too. Google Adsense / Analytics? Invalid password. Dedicated server account manager? Invalid password. Now, I have the servers root password - I just built the box last week and haven't had a chance to send the guy the root password. Wasn't in a rush, I manage the server and they never touch it. Now all of a sudden all the passwords except this one are changed; the writing is on the wall - I am out. Here's the conundrum. I have the root password, they do not. If I give them this password all the leverage I have is gone, out the door and out of my hands. During this argument of why am I not getting paid the guy sends me an email saying "oh by the way, what's the root username and password to the server?". Considering he knows absolutely nothing, I gave him an "admin" account which really has almost no rights. I still have exclusive access to the server, I just don't know where to go. I can hold their data hostage, but I'm almost positive this is the wrong thing to do. I'd consider it blackmail, regardless of whether or not I have gotten paid yet. I can "break" something on the server and give them the whole "well, if you were paying me I could fix it!" spiel. This works from a "well he's not holding their stuff hostage" point of view, but what stops them from hiring some one else to just fix the issue at hand? For all I know the guys nephew is a "l33t hax0r" and can figure it out for free. I can give in, document as much as I can and take him to small claims court. This is breach of contract, I'm not getting paid. I have a case, right? ???? Does anyone have any experience in this? What can I do? What are my options? I'm broke, I can't afford a lawyer and I can barely afford not getting this paycheck. My wife doesn't work (I work two jobs so she doesn't have to work - we have a 1 year old) and is already looking at getting a part time job to cover the bills. Long term we'll be fine, but this has pissed me off beyond belief! Help me out, I'm about to get screwed.

    Read the article

  • Contract for partnering with a client

    - by Everett Toews
    Does anyone know of a good contract template that would be appropriate for partnering with a client? For example, I am creating a web based application with a client that will help guide the development. The application is owned solely by my company but, in exchange for their help, my client will get the application for free in perpetuity. Any other advice in this area? Thanks, Everett

    Read the article

  • 'Design By Contract' in C#

    - by IAmCodeMonkey
    I wanted to try a little design by contract in my latest C# application and wanted to have syntax akin to: public string Foo() { set { Assert.IsNotNull(value); Assert.IsTrue(value.Contains("bar")); _foo = value; } } I know I can get static methods like this from a unit test framework, but I wanted to know if something like this was already built-in to the language or if there was already some kind of framework floating around. I can write my own Assert functions, just don't want to reinvent the wheel.

    Read the article

  • Design by contract: predict methods needed, discipline yourself and deal with code that comes to min

    - by fireeyedboy
    I like the idea of designing by contract a lot (at least, as far as I understand the principal). I believe it means you define intefaces first before you start implementing actual code, right? However, from my limited experience (3 OOP years now) I usually can't resist the urge to start coding pretty early, for several reasons: because my limited experience has shown me I am unable to predict what methods I will be needing in the interface, so I might as well start coding right away. or because I am simply too impatient to write out the whole interfaces first. or when I do try it, I still wind up implementing bits of code already, because I fear I might forget this or that imporant bit of code, that springs to mind when I am designing the interfaces. As you see, especially with the last two points, this leads to a very disorderly way of doing thing. Tasks get mixed up. I should draw a clear line between designing interfaces and actual coding. If you, unlike me, are a good/disciplined planner, as intended above, how do you: ...know the majority of methods you will be needing up front so well? Especially if it's components that implement stuff you are not familiar with yet. ...keep yourself from resisting the urge to start coding right away? ...deal with code that comes to mind when you are designing the intefaces?

    Read the article

  • Ruby and duck typing: design by contract impossible?

    - by davetron5000
    Method signature in Java: public List<String> getFilesIn(List<File> directories) similar one in ruby def get_files_in(directories) In the case of Java, the type system gives me information about what the method expects and delivers. In Ruby's case, I have no clue what I'm supposed to pass in, or what I'll expect to receive. In Java, the object must formally implement the interface. In Ruby, the object being passed in must respond to whatever methods are called in the method defined here. This seems highly problematic: Even with 100% accurate, up-to-date documentation, the Ruby code has to essentially expose its implementation, breaking encapsulation. "OO purity" aside, this would seem to be a maintenance nightmare. The Ruby code gives me no clue what's being returned; I would have to essentially experiment, or read the code to find out what methods the returned object would respond to. Not looking to debate static typing vs duck typing, but looking to understand how you maintain a production system where you have almost no ability to design by contract. Update No one has really addressed the exposure of a method's internal implementation via documentation that this approach requires. Since there are no interfaces, if I'm not expecting a particular type, don't I have to itemize every method I might call so that the caller knows what can be passed in? Or is this just an edge case that doesn't really come up?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >