3 ms·
I second this. The contract should contain every little bit of functionality the client initially wants - from user registration to where the Twitter and Facebo
by bnt 13y ago
I second this. The contract should contain every little bit of functionality the client initially wants - from user registration to where the Twitter and Facebook icons will be on the homepage.
- twic 13y agoNo, this is a terrible idea. It will be a huge and tedious effort, and it cannot succeed - you simply will not be able to write a specification that is watertight enough to prevent the client coming back and asking for changes. It will also eliminate any trace of the flexibility which gives the project even the slimmest chance of success. The right approach is the exact opposite: make this a time and materials contract, where you bill every month for the hours of work done that month. He will be able to ask for fixes to things which are outright bugs (depending on how the law and the contract specify the warranty provisions), but tweaks or enhancements will cost him money. Using this kind of contract makes it very easy to stick to your guns over this.
- onion2k 13y agoIf you've invented a way to conclusively differentiate between what is a bug and what is a change/new feature when you're talking to a client, the entire IT industry needs to know about it. :)