Reports on Phoenix/Minotaur Renaming Focus on Firebird Database Protest
Wednesday April 16th, 2003
InternetNews was one of the first sites to report on the renaming of Phoenix and Minotaur to Firebird and Thunderbird. Australian site LinuxWorld concentrated on the reaction from the Firebird database community, with claims that posts in "the Netscape-Mozilla newsgroup" (it's unclear exactly which newsgroup this refers to) are being censored. CNET News.com also focussed on the controversy, including a link to a page from FirebirdSQL Foundation sponsor IBPhoenix that encourages people to join the "fray" and add to the "heat in [the MozillaZine] forums". The call-to-arms also lists the email addresses of many of the more prominent Mozilla contributors and suggests deluging them with messages (even though many of the listed people had nothing to do with the name change).
Posts to the forums about the name change should be kept polite and constructive and added to the existing name change announcement topic.
Update! The Firebird Admins have posted a statement about Phoenix's renaming to Firebird on their front page. Stating that they "strongly oppose this change", the announcement follows the earlier IBPhoenix article in asking its readers to declare their objections by posting to Mozilla community forums and emailing various Mozilla developers.
#11 Re: Crimony people, THINK!
Wednesday April 16th, 2003 1:41 PM
You are replying to this message
Where do you draw the line, though? There are thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of open source projects out there. The average English speaking person's vocabulary is about 30,000 words (although I could make a case that it's significantly lower in Americans ;). Given that, there is a high probability that any name you don't make up from scratch will be similar to or the same as some OSS project.
So, do you say that only high profile projects count? How do you define that? I think a great case could be made that the database project isn't one (most OSS users I know didn't even know it existed until this flap broke out). Wouldn't it be more sensible not to get your panties in a bunch just because the generic term you like so much was also attractive to someone else?
If they're that concerned that their name be unique, they should have created one. Using a popular generic term is just asking for this to happen, and whining about it when it does the way they're doing is childish.