It sounded to me like the legal firms wanted to do the formal code review themselves, independently.

How much of the software they run do they do their own code reviews on? That sounds weird (not impossible, just weird).

I imagine it's the only way lawyers could off-set liabilities onto someone else if something else ever did happen where confidential information was breached - and they'd be the best ones to know.

The lawyers I worked with years ago never even thought to ask for code reviews of WordPerfect, and later MS Office or Windows. And they sure as hell knew they had 0 chance of suing MS should anything ever go wrong.

Thanks for taking the time to comment. I wish the process for updating or releasing fixes was as easy as logging into their instance and deploying the fix. We were never allowed near their servers. No ssh, no in-house install, nothing. The instructions for installing LogicPull were documented and then sent off. We were pretty much in the dark the entire time, and there was no way around it.

I haven't looked at the source but I did try the online demo and I too do not understand how upgrades/bug fixes would be so problematic. Or why specific branching for individual customers would be required.

Since LogicPull was conceived to be a SAAS, I can see how certain design decisions may have been overlooked that would make supporting a self hosted solution a lot easier. I also think a lot of people who have never worked in an enterprise environment, do not fully understand how customizable a solution has to be. Politics, quality control standards, etc. all play a role and your solution has to be able to adapt. Unless you are in a position like IBM, Microsoft, etc., where you can advocate certain ways of working, your solution really has to be insanely flexible. And if you take this into consideration, you'll design your solution accordingly.