I would say that there are a few other items that have a higher priority
than a new index structure at this point.

Longer Meta Data identifiers - so that people can use their own character
sets for naming of objects.
Schema - this is a major element that is missing from firebird that is
supported by all real competitors to the project (MSSQL, DB2, ORACLE etc)

The lack of these features affect more users than geo based indexing.

If money is going to be thrown around at developers to get needed features
supported, these two items would affect the greatest number of developers.

If a developer stands up to say that it will cost X to have either of these
features implemented, I would agree to send them money once it is done (or
have the money placed in the capable hands of the guys over at ibphoenix)

On 6 January 2011 05:30, Lester Caine <lester@...> wrote:

>
>
> stephane wrote:
> > About sponsoring, can we make a "web page" on firebird website describing
> the
> > project and where everyone that want to sponsor the project can subscribe
> ?
>
> I think that a geo type extension is one of the few things that is missing
> from
> Firebird and is something I keep coming back to look at. geohash may be one
>
> element to look at, but i'm not sure it's course resolution will become a
> problem. It can only mange 19mt at it's finest. But simply porting postgis
> would
> seem to be a good starting point? Given the range of functions already
> available
> there.
>
> As normal, I have more time available than money :(
>
> --
> Lester Caine - G8HFL
> -----------------------------
> Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
> Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]