>>I just read it and replied to you. I want to say something publicly that won't reveal any confidences but I think those who have jumped in should hear. IMO the fault was entirely your colleague's. Somehow from your public posts I got the impression you had done something pretty awful. You didn't. You have a petty and insecure colleague, that's all. Not that it wouldn't be better for it to be patched up, because you do have to work with this bozo on a day to day basis, but if there is any apologizing to be done he is the one who should be doing it.
>
>Mike,
>
>I think you got it wrong. I've discussed this issue recently with Sergey Berezniker. Basically, then someone gives you a whole solution by writing the code for you instead of just passing the idea and especially if there is an original working code you would feel that you're not respected. The whole thing is about how do you present the ideas and code samples. You always have to take into the account somebody's else feelings. I usually start with the problem itself when I'm looking at the code and that leads to all the problems...
>
>Anyway, the guy we're talking about is a great programmer and has a very nice personality. He has a rare ability to always make friends with various people he meets - in shops, in a train, in a cafe. We were on a very friendly basis when I just started to work. I did also help him a lot with the initial programming of the system (we did pair programming and I've enjoyed it greatly).


Pay very little attention to Beano and the others! They are losers!<g> I think two phrases should suffice for patching up this relationship. Those two phrases have gotten me through 28 years of marriage. "I'm sorry" and "Yes dear". Well you may not be able to use the second one, but the first one goes a long way. The good thing is you don't have to mean it, you just have to say it and sound like you do!<vbg>