> Personally, I don't see the point in changing it. Having "firebird"
> allows to append any suffix for special related developments.
> Having "firebirdSQL" makes this task awkward.

I think this argument of Claudio is good. It was mentioned before by
Robert and others.

There would be a possibility to fix this problem and at the same time
have a compromise solution for the name question. This is just
another suggestion of mine, keep cool :)

The naming system where the word ending is changed to designate
different products of a product family (products made by the same
company) is quite usual. The corresponding trademarks are called a
trademark family.

For an example you can look at easy.com, a show ran by "Easy Group":

EasyGroup
EasyJet
EasyMoney
EasyCar...

Why not do the same for Firebird? I mean why not see the core
product, the RDBMS, as part of a product family? That would look like
this:

Firebird Database Project
FirebirdSQL (the main product)
FirebirdXML (e.g. an XML parser)
FirebirdSOAP (a SOAP connectivity thingy)
etc.

That would mean the title of the website would be Firebird, or why
not Firebird Database Project (with "Database Project" in smaller
letters). Depending on the evolution of the whole thing, it could
later still become "Firebird Software Foundation" (like Apache), or
whatever else.

On the other hand, the main product would be FirebirdSQL. So advert
badges would say "powered by FirebirdSQL", indicating the type of
product. And the choice of the domain would receive a formal
justification, it would be the name of the core product.

Ok, maybe it looks a bit odd to have (for the moment) a product
family with only one product? :) Well I think it would be quite fine.

What do you think?

Regards
Markus