markus.soell@... wrote:

>
> Hi Reed,
> I'm not going to comment this between the lines again, it's
> pointless. I think we both have made our respective position clear
> and they could not be more opposed to one another.
>
> To give a summary of your position: You agree the current Firebird
> community isn't united, there are many different websites with
> different names, and you like it that way.

Not particularly. I accept it as a fact, and do not believe
that an 'official' web site will change it.

> You don't think the name
> Firebird is of any importance for the community and you are
> indifferent to the question whether this brand will be widely known
> or not.

Right. It is the product that is important to the community.

> You don't want Firebird to work with money from sponsors,
> because money might become more important than peer contacts.

I'm not averse to sponsorship. Some care would have to be taken
implementing it. What I am averse to is an organization that
puts brand, market share and marketing in a position of more
importance than doing the right thing for the product and the
user community.
That seems to be your attitude, if not your stated position. This
is what I was referring to when I said it seemed like your were
trying to make firebird a organization that is like a company
that doesn't make money. A (commercial) company is driven by market
share and units sold.

>You
> don't see why it would be of any use to have an "official" Firebird
> because, according to you, Firebird shall have no center and no
> cohesion, no objective for Firebird to achieve a good position
> (market share) in the database market,... Short, you don't care about
> anything and want others to do the same.
>

LOL. I care about lots of things...

Your right though, I do not see firebird gaining 'share' in the
'database market' as a worthwhile goal >in it's own right<. It
should be used by those for whom it is actually the right tool
for the job.
If MySQL, or even Oracle, is actually the right tool for a
particular job, then none of us should be afraid to say it. Even
on our 'official' web site. Now there are some of us who, out of
pride or sense of challenge, might go and make firebird the right
tool for that job, and that's fine too.

This seems to be my fundamental argument with you... to me
market share is incidental. To you, it >defines< success.
That is the quintessence of commercial software, and, to me
the antithesis of open source.
(Even if he does joke about world domination now, when Linus
wrote his first kernel, he was not trying to take over the PC
unix market. When Larry Wall wrote perl, he wrote it to get a
job done. When the Apache group started calling their set of
patches to the NCSA web server Apache, they were just trying to
get a better web server. These things have huge 'market share'
now, not because they were marketed, or had coherent messages,
but because they are the right tool for a large number of jobs.)

Regarding a cohesive goal, the firebird group (as defined by those
who are members of the firebird sourceforge project) does not have
a very well defined except to do the right thing with the code.
That is neither good nor bad.

> Ok, I agree, my position is pretty much the opposite: I would prefer
> a community which unites behind one name (Firebird) to give itself an
> identity, so it can be perceived in the market. I want a community
> which aims for a high market share for its product and who gives
> itself a professional look and presents itself in a coherent manner
> to acheive this.

Why is market share a goal in itself ? Will the world be a better
place if more people use firebird than MySQL ? To me, the community
(meaning the USERS of firebird) use it because it fits their particular
needs, their skill set, or their particular philosophical bent. To them,
it is the right tool. The aim of the firebird group is to make it an
even better tool. It does not become a better tool by convincing more
people to use it, though more people may use it if it does become
a better tool.

> I would welcome sponsoring to have financial support
> for Firebird development and would therefore adopt a core
> organization which makes this possible.
>

I would welcome sponsoring because if it could help firebird
be more useful to it's user community.

> Just note that I don't want anything more for Firebird than what all
> the other OSS projects have as well: an identity!
>

You believe that identity is the important part of OSS ?
To each his own, I suppose.

> Markus.

[...]

--
Reed Mideke
email: rfm(at)cruzers.com -If that fails: rfm(at)portalofevil.com