Hi Robert,
Yes of course, you're right. Guess my thing isn't clear enough. I'll
try to word it differently.

Of course, 99% of Firebird code is InterBase. That's what I referred
to as a "historical" relation, maybe not very clear ;)

The whole article is more about trademarks than about technical
things. From a trademark point of view, it doesn't matter who
somewhen wrote that code. Of course it's Borland code mainly, for
both: same origin.

But for the trademark aspect, the only thing that matters is who
makes the build. And there the origins are different: One is from
Borland the other from the community.

Yes I guess you're right it's worth to mention that the connection is
both historical and technical. What I was trying to say is, that
there isn't any direct economical relationship between Borland and
the community. Because Borland doesn't want to work together with the
community. I'll try to get that more clear, thanks for the remark.

Markus

--- In IBDI@y..., "Robert F. Tulloch" <tultalk@a...> wrote:
> Hi:
>
> > I've tried to type an answer to your message, but also and mainly
to
> > this entire discussion about the future of the Firebird SQL
database
> > and how the community should deal with Borland Corp.
> >
> > Well, I ended up with quite a long text and finally decided it's
> > better to put it on a HTML page rather than posting to the list.
>
> How can you possibly make a statement like this:
>
> The relation is historical, at various levels, but it's historical
only. The two
> products are certainly very similar, but they have different
origins: InterBase is
> from Borland, Fire bird from the Community.
>
> The do not have different "origins", Their "origin" is the same
in that Fire bird is
> the open source IBC which "has been modified?".