> Two Questions from Martijn Tonies:
> Q6. Ok - in your opinion, what should Firebird do?
> I think FB should do exactly what it does at the moment, that's fine.
> My issues with it are in terms of accessability, ease of use,
> samples and examples, and documentation for the beginner. In fact I
> haven't experienced what it can do beacuse of the massive barrier to
> entry, long since forgotten by experts like you, but that confronts
> every new user to the product.

Did you check the "quick starting quide"? Did you check
the Release Notes?

In addition to that, there IS documentation being written,
but this is a slow process. Currently, the de-facto
docs is The Firebird Book, which, I believe, you already
have.

Remember, Firebird started with a lot of features from
the beginning, but the documentation had to be re-written
as it was still copyrighted.

> Q7. What did you expect it to do?
> I expected in 2004 more positive answers to Q1 & Q2.

I expected a more positive attitude from your instead of
writing things like "geni-ass" in order to address people
that give a whole lot to the Firebird project.

In order to get answers, I wouldn't start by calling people
names. But then again, it's free world, it this is your way
of working, feel free to do so.

So, where does "xml" fit in? Exactly no-where. XML has
nothing to do with a DBMS perse. It's not something that
Firebird will do. Even IF it would be able to export to
XML, it's a client-tool thingy.

IMO of course.

--
Martijn Tonies