> 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.

Yeah ! That is exactly my point. You better expressed it.
(a) Let's unite in a single tree and work with Borland
OR
(b) Let's forget about them, but **clearly** fork the product once and for all and never ever look back on what Borland may do or not in the future.

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Riho-Rene Ellermaa" <riho.ellermaa@...>
To: <IBDI@egroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:54 AM
Subject: RE: [IBDI] Re: Comments on IBDI article I just posted...


> 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