Olivier Mascia wrote:

> I do not want to be rude on anybody, but truly (one or two L by the way

?),

one. :-)

> my database friends, don't we have *any* more urgent or important issues

to

> work on regarding Interbase (fork or not), than trying to find a new name
> for it ?

Yes we do, but until we have working mailing lists regarding the different
issues, a web-page with links, and a majority of users accepting we're going
to SourceForge (which IMO is the only reasonable alternative (left)), we
might as well try to be productive by trying to come up with a new name. I
for one (and I think others also) are hacking a bit at the sources right
now, but it probably goes a bit slow since there is no place to post patches
to. Yet.

> I do care (and work the way I can) on getting the complete test system
> released by Inprise. I do care on getting the bits forgotten from this
> initial source code release to be properly published. I do care on getting
> the documentation released open-source.

This I think we all agree upon. But to call it "forgotten" is a stretch I
think. This was deliberate, no dubt about it. Apparently Borland/Interprise
(pardon the language) screwed us (the community waiting for the Open Source
IB6) and probably feel rather good about it right now. What's left?
We must create our own test-sets, write our own documentation and so on.
Let's hope we can put this work under a license that BorPrise and their
beloved lawyers can't benefit from (GPL?, Artistic License?).

> I know we all do care about all these and more :-)
> But I sometimes find we are all like kids in school.
> Too easily disturbed from their main tasks.

An the main task is?
IMO it's
1. Get a home for this project. AFAIK the only feasible is SourceForge. That
is, if you don't enjoy hunting information from a bunch of mailing lists
from a bunch of sites with no reasonable way to search in the old posts,
using a couple of different news servers and so on. Then there's the matter
of a w3 page and bugtracking and ...
2. Get the code to a state where we can read it, and the start analyzing it.
3. Analyze it, and the determine the design.
4. Document this (current) design.
5. Create *logical* directories from this design.
6. Open the CVS.

Beside these activities I see lots of other work that can be done that don't
depend upon any of these tasks. One of'em would to either conveince a lawyer
in the US to pursue their promise of an open source ODBC driver, or write on
ourselves (I know, the person writing that one was also screwed by'em).

> Oh, by the way, don't you think that no matter what Inprise did|did not
> to|for Interbase in the past, Inprise is still important today for the
> success|failure of the open-sourcing of Interbase ?

No. I think they're "left to their own devices". The success of IB is now in
the hands of us developers. They've already made up their minds about
screwing us by throwing at us a "bunch of code" without all the other vital
information. Since we have to research this ourselves, whatever comes out of
this is not covered by the IPL. It's work, pretty hard work I'd say, but if
BorPrise wants to play this game, I'd say that we play along, with the same
set of rules! Take that statement as you like.

> There are still
> important resources in their hands (not yet released to the public). I'd
> better spend some more effort, if not dollars, to help 'round the square
> angles' and get those missing things.

I think we all appreciate if anyone could (monetary or otherwise) convince
them to what they promised in the first place (which is to open IB6, and
that they haven't, just parts of it). I wouldn't hold my breath though.

Best of luck to your efforts,

Mike Nordell