@DosDawg: I agree that there's too much information there, but then again I can understand Andrew's angle, given that we've recently have had a very unsavory experience with two former trainee employees in our company. They both abused some of their access privileges, as well as caused substantial damage by deleting large quantities of files and data. (And the code that we still have left from them was sub-standard by several counts.)

If they would have had communications with our global customers, see more and if there were any indication that they might have been up to no good there, I would definitely have posted a public advisory with all necessary and relevant detail to protect our customer base from possible abuse by disgruntled ex-employees (who were fair and square the party at fault).

I can't speak of Andrew's possible hidden motivations, but I read this announcement under basic damage control. (Aside its obviously being a stab back at someone who stabbed his company.) I'm sure Aramis is basically a good guy, but good guys can sometimes do really stupid things, and will have to face the music accordingly.

Of course if Aramis has approached Boonex with a conciliatory attitude, and tied up his work relationship gracefully, I'd agree that this announcement is unreasonable -- but I really don't know what happened behind the scenes. From what I gather from all this, Andrew is of the opinion that Aramis has systematically abused his position, and thereby caused noteworthy damage to their business.