I have to agree with that. They are exactly my thoughts - why drag Borland
with us. Let them do (or not do) what they want.
If the Firebird development team contains all the needed brainpower then why
not just make the Firebird database system nad cut it off from Interbase.
Otherwise there is no point in calling it Firebird when actually it's
exactly Interbase, only with slight modifications.
And there would be less confusion among users - should I use IB or FB, whats
the difference, are they compatible etc.

Riho-Rene Ellermaa
senior programmer
Hansabank

> Sorry, I have to disagree big time.
>
> If it is the Borland tree only, I'm outahere. They will find
> a way to kill
> the whole thing. As far as Borland was concerned, Interbase
> was dead one
> year ago. People from the community managed to save it, and yet were
> betrayed once again.
>
> I've developed a client application in C++ that uses the
> Interbase API. I
> am building in a switch that will use ODBC. If I see that development
> becomes dependent on Borland in any way, I will switch to SQL
> Server. If
> Firebird continues independent development, I will stay with Firebird.
>
> more below
>