Looking for real/practical advice on multi-programmer environment

1

Looking for Guidance on Contractual Protection in a Newly Multi‑Developer Clarion Environment

Please read to the end. I’m not looking for commentary on how messy this situation is — I’m looking for constructive, proactive ways to stay ahead of it and protect myself. Thanks in advance.

Background

I’ve been the sole developer for this company for 13 years. I built and maintained their entire Clarion codebase. Per contract, all development has always been done on my local machine, using Clarion and 3rd‑party licenses purchased by me and registered in my name.

Every Friday, I upload a full ZIP of the development environment (not .\Clarion, but .\Project) containing everything needed to reproduce the build (every APP, DCT, template, class, and all generated CLW source). I’ve operated as a fully autonomous work‑for‑hire developer - they own their source.

Recent Changes

The company was bought out. The previous owners left. For ~18 months, nothing changed. Then they hired 4+ developers to build a completely new SQL‑based, web‑based system — and I was excluded from that project.

They also decided they wanted another developer contributing to the existing Clarion system. I provided a detailed spreadsheet outlining exactly how to set up a working Clarion dev environment. It sat ignored for eight months.

Suddenly it became urgent. Instead of asking me to help set up a VM, they attempted it themselves. FYI: I suggested a separate Win 11 Pro VM - They installed it on a production Windows 2019 Server Machine w/ Live production data on it).

They purchased and installed the latest Clarion v12 and current 3rd‑party extensions — despite the fact that the production system has been frozen at Clarion 11.0.13372 and template versions from ~3 years ago. I’ve repeatedly documented the risks of not updating, but the previous owners mandated the freeze. When I have updated in the past it is a coordinated process of upgrades and thorough regression testing.

After they finally provided proof of licenses, I copied my .\Clarion environment to their machine, got everything configured, and confirmed the entire system compiles cleanly.

I’ve used Park’s version control for years, and with GitHub in place, the infrastructure is ready for multi‑developer work.

Caveats

  1. There has been zero discussion about multi‑developer workflow:
    • Who coordinates changes
    • Who owns production builds
    • Branching/merging strategy
    • Release management
  2. The new developer has no Clarion experience and has never supported a traditional Windows desktop application. (Yes, you read this right)

What I Need Advice On

I want to formally update my contract to protect myself now that other developers will be modifying the Clarion codebase.

Specifically, I want language stating:

  • I support a multi‑developer environment, but I cannot be held responsible for any changes made by other developers, especially those without the experience required to maintain a legacy Clarion/Topspeed system.
  • I am not liable for damage, data loss, corruption, or regression caused by others’ lack of Clarion knowledge, improper use of templates, or failure to follow established development practices.
  • My responsibility is limited to the work I personally perform and changes I personally commit.

I’m looking for guidance from others who have been in similar situations — especially those who’ve had to protect themselves when a long‑standing single‑developer legacy system suddenly becomes a multi‑developer environment with inexperienced contributors.

What contractual language or boundaries have you successfully put in place? What pitfalls should I anticipate?

Thanks

2

Hi Kevin -

I have zero legal knowledge, but one thing you can do to help right off the bat:

  1. Protect the main branch from direct commits. That’s protecting from anybody. You, them, everybody. The only way to update the main branch is by pull request. Even if you don’t require a peer review, this is a good practice.
3

This is good advice. I just recently started involvin on-prem developers into a project (.net), assuming that using Claude.ai, they can actually contribute. First thing I did was creating a company profile on GitHub to be able to protect the master branch. Given the amount of amateure code provided in the first pull requests, I am convinced this is the way it should be.

For legal, not so sure. I have contract with this customer that I own all my code as long as I am able/willing to maintain it. If I for any reason become incapacitated, they have the right to continue developing and using the code within their company. But surely, if they already own the source, your responsibility can go no longer than what you yourself provide. IMO, it should be the company’s dev that should have the responsibilty of code review and merging, if you are the hired hand.

4

I don’t think there are many contract lawyers here Kevin and that is what you need.

You apparently want to continue being involved with the software?
You apparently want to continue as an independent developer?

Personally, I would try to find a lawyer experienced in software contract law and get their advice. They would also want to see your current contract.

It’s a real upheaval when a business that has grown successfully with Clarion based systems are sold and what you are going through is not unusual. Best of luck!

5

The first question is: Will they sign a new contract?
If they won’t you have to be willing to terminate your existing agreement, hand them a document “terms of service for non-binding if you call” and walk.
Life is too short.

As stated, while I really like Clarion and it’s productivity, it’s never made it mainstream. Grass roots businesses were the core and when them grow or get sold, everything is replaced.

If they will sign a new agreement, simple language like you have is good, but I would add back story to explain the need for the change.