> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert F. Tulloch [mailto:tultalk@...]
> Sent: Martes 12 de Septiembre de 2000 21:28
>
> I got thrown off the IB Arch list for engaging in what was deemed by
> Helen as inappropriate. She said it should be here. So now I see folks
> discussing the exchange between Helen and some fellow doing a little
> bashing and comments start coming that that is inappropriate here.
>
> What is the purpose of this list since discussion regarding the
> history and future of Interbase is off topic as well as the occasional
> support question and IB Arch is I guess for those technical folks who
> have been accused of trying to "fork" the code?
>
> Thanks.

IB-Architect is not a support list. It's for discussing issues pertaining
the design of the engine, as you know. And probably, a trouble with the
engine if it's seen from an internal design view.

IB-Priorities is for things people think that the engine must implement or
fix. There's no need to know the engine to post a concern.

IB-Marketing is an almost abandoned list know that the ISC deal died.

IB-Designer is for the team whose coordinator or Great Boss is Dalton
Calford. The idea is to come with a kind of graphical design environment for
IB. There're some sub-projects of the whole task.

IB-Conversions is to get help when converting from anything to IB. It
doesn't carry automatic answers to any question. People asking things should
cooperate, too, with their kwnowledge on the source format/engine, when
nobody in the list knows the full answer.

There're other lists. I won't list all of them. Probably they are detailed
in the interbase2000.org site.

Usually, technical issues are preferred to be derived to Mers list.

Now, what does fit here? Good question, Robert. This list is for general
concerns about InterBase® and it replaced the older and original
SaveInterbase list that was created around end of 1999. It can host things
like new names for the engine, general non-very technical discussions, ideas
about the future of IB (to avoid cluttering Mers), misunderstandings, the IB
license and even flames and clashes. AFAIK, this is the list that has more
readers.

This is taken from the list charter at
http://www.egroups.com/group/IBDI as it's now:
«
IBDI
Founded January 5, 2000
Description
The purpose of this list is to unite InterBase developers under the flag of
the Interbase Developer Initiative, a merging of groups dedicated to
ensuring that developers and, through them, their customers, will have a
controlling interest in the future development of Interbase under open
source. It is from the membership of this list that tactics will be
effected to arm us with the best possible information on which to base our
proposals.
All are welcome aboard who share this common objective and who are willing
to give time and effort to it.
Members: 464
»

The problem is not whether the topic in discussion was appropriate for this
list or not. Ostriches, while related to IB, can be reviewed here. <g> In
fact, the article from Maureen O'Gara cannot be put under discussion in
another list without going off-topic... unless you want to carry it to a
non-tech NG on Borland. The problem is that some readers felt annoyed with a
discussion they think doesn't carry any real merit or maybe because the
points in discussion were deemed to be too subjective or too subtle or
without enough clear proofs (select your option) to have any hope in
reaching an agreement.

The only objection to the thread could be that the charter says "to UNITE
IB developers" and I'm not sure if this is happening. Anyway, a community
without clashes is a very utopian community. Like it or not, people have the
freedom to disagree and sometimes, to disagree strongly.

C.
---------
Claudio Valderrama C.
Ingeniero en Informática - Consultor independiente
http://www.cvalde.com