Re: http://www.hjrdba.com/

"koert54" <koert54_at_nospam.com> wrote in message news:EeOA8.58064$Ze.8902_at_afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
> howard - why didn't you use an alias like .... howard54 or something :-)

I didn't see a need for an alias since I informed my manager the day the new website went up.

I also didn't think it was a very good idea since I post here under my own name, have nothing to hide, and it seemed only logical that someone who thought my posts were useful would thus find my website equally useful. Not sure that www.alias.com would have inspired the same degree of confidence!

>
> Anyhow - thanks for the great docs you published ...

Thank you, and thanks to everyone else who's posted or emailed the same general opinion. Depressed though I am at recent events, such comments have persuaded me that it is worthwhile to keep going.

Regards
HJR
>
> "Howard J. Rogers" <dba_at_hjrdba.com> wrote in message
> news:aauv0b$s1f$1_at_lust.ihug.co.nz...
> > I have to be extremely careful what I say.
> >
> > So all I wanted to say was thank you for this thread, because I finally
> get
> > to see that some people thought the material was good, which I really
> didn't
> > know for sure before.
> >
> > Regards
> > HJR
> >
> >
> > "Sean M" <smckeownNO_at_BACKSIESearthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:3CD2E4F6.8EC8F659_at_BACKSIESearthlink.net...
> > > Sorry for the double-post, but just wanted to add one more thought
that
> > > occurred to me. This whole discussion is likely very unfair to
Howard.
> > > My guess is that he can't comment publicly on the matter (else I'm
sure
> > > he would have by now), so we should probably just let the thread die
and
> > > give both parties the benefit of the doubt. It's mostly speculation
and
> > > conjecture, including my own comments.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Sean
> > >
> > > [My views do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.]
> > >
> > > Sean M wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Andrew Mobbs wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure I agree with the "as well they should". My employer
> makes
> > > > > billing software, clearly I should ensure I don't accidently write
a
> > > > > billing system in my spare time. However, I don't think my
employer
> > owns
> > > > > *everything* I think about in my spare time, even if it is
> > peripherally
> > > > > connected with the business. We don't know the details of HJR's
> case,
> > > > > so I can't comment directly on that.
> > > >
> > > > True, that comment may have gone too far. But the answer would
depend
> > > > heavily on what sort of agreement Howard signed when he started work
> for
> > > > Oracle. I'd bet there was some pretty strict wording on what is and
> > > > isn't acceptable or what is and isn't owned by Oracle.
> > > >
> > > > > I negotiated a modification to the IPR clause on my employment
> > contract
> > > > > before I signed it, clarifying what I could do in my own time.
Since
> > IPR
> > > > > is about half the software business, it's important to sort out
> where
> > > > > you stand with your employer (and occasionally wear a GNU t-shirt
> into
> > > > > work :-).
> > > >
> > > > Sounds like a pretty smart move, but not all employers would have
been
> > > > as accomodating in hiring negotiaions.
> > > >
> > > > > Commiserations to Howard though, it must be very annoying to have
> your
> > > > > employer suppress something you've put so much time and effort
into.
> > > >
> > > > Agreed, defintiely.
> > > >
> > > > Regrads,
> > > > Sean
> > > >
> > > > [My views do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.]
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Sat May 04 2002 - 22:51:40 CDT