Subject | Re: [Firebird-general] Re: So much for Mozilla dropping Firebird |
---|---|
Author | Martijn Tonies |
Post date | 2003-08-30T11:36:58Z |
Brendan,
We've been sorry for the un-intended mail-bomb (or so it was called)
and you guys have been "sorry, but hey, it's legal" for using the Firebird
name. Perhaps we should stop sorry-ing now, and it's time for some
action. If this sounds a little strong or annoyed, well, you're right about
that.
of the doubt, and you have obviously failed to comply. The whole
"internal codename" thing is but a mere hoax to me. There's no such
thing as an internal codename for such a publicly available and well
known project. You knew from the beginning that Firebird (without
Mozilla in front of it) would be used in articles, newsgroups, websites
and much much more. No, you can't help that, neither can we - but
the fact is:
admins and the Firebird Foundation who try to look after Firebird
in it's best interest.
What happes after this week we're giving you now? Will the Mozilla
Foundation decide it doesn't give jack shit about us and continue
using the Firebird name? Most probably so.
As for me, I've had it up to here (makes gesture) and I'm getting more
and more annoyed by this game you're playing - even if unintentionally.
Brendan, get your act together - drop the Firebird name, as internal
fakename and as a normal project name. All your branding ideas
(about Mozilla Firebird instead of Firebird) have FAILED to be
used by the public and your followers. We expected that, you guys
naively didn't...
In hindsigth, we should have never let you have until June to fix the
issue.
--
Martijn Tonies
> > > > > That document does not conform to the Mozilla brandingPersonally, I think there has been too much sorry - from both sides.
> document we
> > > > > published during 1.4
> (http://www.mozilla.org/roadmap/branding.html).
> > > > > I'll make sure it gets fixed to use the right name. Sorry
> about that.
> > > >
> >
> > Brendan, four weeks have elapsed since you said this, but it is not
> fixed yet.
>
> I'm sorry for that. We've had a lot to do lately, setting up the
> Mozilla Foundation, finding colocation space, moving machines, etc.
> We're not done yet. The roadmap is obviously out of date along with
> the branding policy.
We've been sorry for the un-intended mail-bomb (or so it was called)
and you guys have been "sorry, but hey, it's legal" for using the Firebird
name. Perhaps we should stop sorry-ing now, and it's time for some
action. If this sounds a little strong or annoyed, well, you're right about
that.
> We want to fix the branding problem soon. I'm not able to speak forAfter the initial cool down, we have been giving you guys the benefit
> staff right now, but I hope to have something to say within a week or
> so. Please bear with us.
>
of the doubt, and you have obviously failed to comply. The whole
"internal codename" thing is but a mere hoax to me. There's no such
thing as an internal codename for such a publicly available and well
known project. You knew from the beginning that Firebird (without
Mozilla in front of it) would be used in articles, newsgroups, websites
and much much more. No, you can't help that, neither can we - but
the fact is:
> and I personally don't believe any actual harm has been done in theThis isn't for you to decide! That's OUR job - the Firebird project
> marketplace.
admins and the Firebird Foundation who try to look after Firebird
in it's best interest.
What happes after this week we're giving you now? Will the Mozilla
Foundation decide it doesn't give jack shit about us and continue
using the Firebird name? Most probably so.
As for me, I've had it up to here (makes gesture) and I'm getting more
and more annoyed by this game you're playing - even if unintentionally.
Brendan, get your act together - drop the Firebird name, as internal
fakename and as a normal project name. All your branding ideas
(about Mozilla Firebird instead of Firebird) have FAILED to be
used by the public and your followers. We expected that, you guys
naively didn't...
In hindsigth, we should have never let you have until June to fix the
issue.
--
Martijn Tonies