> 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.

It is hard enough nowadays to want to 'sell' our choice of Interbase to customers.
Two falsely competing versions (hence trees) is one too much.
Now, that THE single tree remaining is the current FireBird or the current Borland does not change anything as long as there is only one and I do not really care which one.

Or another solution : definitely and totally fork/branch once and for all.
Call the product FireBird but call it that way everywhere.
Eliminate any and all traces of the name Borland and InterBase everywhere else in the code (except of course in the required licensing text in all existing code). And declare the branch as complete and non-reversable.

That will be the same net effect. One product, one code-tree. Today the branch is in place, though not effective because everybody tried to keep things close enough to maybe re-synch regularly. Bad idea on the long term. Work with Borland OR fork from Borland, but in that case, let's really do it once and for all. Today the situation is unclear. And that is not good. I think we agree on the idea.

Olivier Mascia, om@..., Senior Software Engineer
T.I.P. Group S.A., www.tipgroup.com, Director

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kyle Green" <kyle@...>
To: <IBDI@egroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: [IBDI] Re: Comments on IBDI article I just posted...


> 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
>
> At 09:24 AM 1/17/01 +0100, you wrote:
> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >Hash: SHA1
> >
> >> Perhaps we should do a poll to see how many people want Firebird and Borland
> >> to resolve their efforts into a single unified development effort.
> >>
> >
> >I vote for the unification of the development effort. And as soon as possible.
> >
> >I do not care wether Borland contributes much or not through its employees
> >to the new developments of the source tree. I do not care wether the product
> >is called InterBase or FireBird. But I am concerned that there are TWO code
> >trees. Borland *must* give admin rights on the CVS tree to at least 2 or 3
> >well-known and devoted to the task people of the InterBase community outside
> >Borland).
>
> What they give one day can be taken away the next
>
> >Borland *must* work publicly in the open-sourced tree.
>
> Policy stated one day can be changed the next
>
> >The
> >Community *must* work in the so-called Borland tree, be adult enough to
> >forget the past issues (don't you say "let by-gones be by-gones" in usa ?),
> >and work on code and share it.
>
> The community is generous and trustworthy. Borland is not.
>
> >Borland *must* open-source the IB-6
> >documentation. You can't open-source a product while keeping in the
> >refrigerator the documentation. Childish game.
>
> An example of why I don't want to depend on them. They don't get it.
>
>
> >I'm no guru, no evangelist, but have my eyes opened : the future of
> >InterBase/FireBird depends on the unification. InterBase is already loosing
> >users. I would not like the idea of being one of the last ones to abandon
> >the ship. It's not yet sinking, it still can be 'repaired'. But time is
> >certainly working against it.
>
> Firebird can thrive. It will move even faster if people quit holding their
> breaths waiting for Borland to come around. Just forget them and move
> ahead. All the talent needed is present. We will actually chase talent away
> if we force them to stay in this bad marriage with Borland.
>
> Again, only my opinion :)
>
> Kyle
>
>
> >Olivier Mascia, om@..., Senior Software Engineer
> >T.I.P. Group S.A., www.tipgroup.com, Director