MozillaZine

IBPhoenix Calls For More Focussed and Courteous Protest Campaign

Thursday April 17th, 2003

IBPhoenix, the FirebirdSQL Foundation sponsor who yesterday called for a mass forum posting and emailing campaign in opposition of Phoenix's renaming to Firebird, have reconsidered the scale of their protest. In an update posted on the IBPhoenix front page, the group says: "Yesterday, your voice was heard on their forums and in broadly targetted email. We've got their attention. Now, we should make our argument, simply, cogently, and with the respect owed by one open source group to another."

In a new article published today, Firebird Admin Ann Harrison asks fellow members of the Firebird database community to "stop broadcasting our dismay widely and focus instead on those people who can actually affect the decision." Adding that "the point is not to smother them in accuratory (sic) or derogatory messages", Harrison calls for future emails to be sent only to Mitchell Baker, mozilla.org's Chief Lizard Wrangler, and Asa Dotzler, who announced Phoenix's new name on Monday.

The statement also includes a plea for civility: "When writing to the Mozilla forum or MozillaZine, use the same courtesy we use with each other in our discussions. Better yet, use the courtesy that we often use when we haven't forgotten ourselves and jumped on a soap-box." As one of the sites affected by this protest, we at MozillaZine welcome this move as a step in the right direction.

Update! Benman writes: "Slashdot has an article on the Mozilla Firebird name debate."

Another Update! The Firebird database project's front page article in protest of the renaming has been updated to remove the list of Mozilla developers' contact details. The announcement now requests that the Firebird database community only post to their own Firebird-general mailing list (which was known as IBDI until it was renamed on Wednesday). IBPhoenix have also modified their original statement to purge many Mozilla email addresses.


#1 Good start

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 12:43 PM

Reply to this message

Here's hoping this hubbub is finally ending. Brazilians take note!

#16 Re: Good start

by ArnoB

Thursday April 17th, 2003 3:51 PM

Reply to this message

At least we should end up side by side!

#45 Re: Good start

by tuqui

Thursday April 17th, 2003 9:33 PM

Reply to this message

> Brazilians take note! Then who is lacking courtesy?.

#63 The 100s of Brazilian spammers

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 4:53 AM

Reply to this message

The hundreds of spammers with a .br address.

#73 Thank you

by filochard

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:34 AM

Reply to this message

I have read some of your posts here, and though I'm no brazilian, would like to tell you to please make it a little less aggressive. Thanks !

#2 I don't get the need for a name at all.

by jdakula

Thursday April 17th, 2003 12:48 PM

Reply to this message

I really think that if Phoenix and Minotaur are going to become the browser and mail clients, respectively, they should just be called Navigator and Mail & Newsgroups like they always have been. That's the branding we've had in Mozilla for years now, there's no trademark issues because Netscape/AOL already have those products, and there's no confusion to end users.

#6 Agreement

by complinguist

Thursday April 17th, 2003 1:48 PM

Reply to this message

Hey, that's a good idea, I like it. It may not be cool enough for some but it is very practical. Instead of Phonex or Firebird, we could just call it Mozilla Navigator or Mozilla Mail, which to me seems very sensible.

#21 Totally.

by mattdm <mattdm@mattdm.org>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:29 PM

Reply to this message

Or even "Mozilla Web Browser" and "Mozilla Mail". *Mozilla* is a great name, and as I understand it, the trademark battles there have already been fought and won -- or at least settled.

#33 Once again...

by cgonyea

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:16 PM

Reply to this message

Once again, the name Mozilla is not going away. It will be Mozilla Firebird and Mozilla Thunderbird.

#43 You're missing the point.

by mattdm <mattdm@mattdm.org>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 9:14 PM

Reply to this message

We *know* that the name Mozilla is staying. The question is: why is the name "Navigator" going away? And if it must, what's wrong with "Web Browser" as a replacement? Sure, it might be fun to come up with an original zippy name, but obviously it's very hard to do that. So why not go with the fundamentals?

#48 that's a horrible idea

by luserpete <doane@canada.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 10:47 PM

Reply to this message

Web Browser!?!?!? WEB BROWSER!?!?! That's the way to get peopel to use your product, give it the lamest name possible. Navigator never was a Mozilla name, it's a Netscape name. THAT would cause more confusion than this whole database thing.

#79 welll...

by mattdm <mattdm@mattdm.org>

Friday April 18th, 2003 7:02 AM

Reply to this message

It works for Microsoft -- Microsoft Word, for example. They keep their main name the primary focus, and leave the program name descriptive. This has the secondary effect of making the product sound like *the* definitive example of the category. As for "Navigator", the Mozilla build I'm using from yesterday sure does call the browser component "Navigator", so it's a bit of stretch to say it was never a Mozilla name. I understand (slightly) a wish to disassociate from Netscape, which is why I suggest just Web Browser -- it's more clear anyway.

#49 Re: You're missing the point.

by choess <choess@stwing.upenn.edu>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 10:55 PM

Reply to this message

Because "Firebird" and "Thunderbird" aren't the officially distributed browser/mailnews client yet? Looking back at naming of Gecko-based stuff, the non-descriptive "zippy" names have all been given to subsidiary projects: Galeon, Chimera/Camino, and now Phoenix/Firebird. They're named to distinguish them from the "standard" mozilla.org-distributed binaries. The official names of the mozilla.org distribution components are, IIRC, Mozilla Navigator, Mozilla Mail, and Mozilla Composer (plus Chatzilla, DOM Inspector, etc.), mirroring the names of the NS4 components (s/Mozilla/Netscape/). Popular use also follows that for NS4: the browser is "Mozilla" (Netscape) unless there's a need to specifically distinguish it from the other components in the suite. I don't think I've ever heard anyone use "Mozilla Navigator" other than in official mozilla.org announcements; everyone seems to just refer to it as "the Mozilla browser" when necessary. Anyway, what I'm driving at is that once "Firebird" and "Thunderbird" start getting distributed from mozilla.org, I don't see any reason to believe people are going to stop calling the browser and mail client "Mozilla" and "Mozilla Mail" (or "Browser" and "Mailnews", as in Bugzilla). Once they become the trunk, Firebird and Thunderbird are probably going to turn into obsolete codenames like Seamonkey, meaningless to anyone outside of Mozilla development.

#64 Mozilla itself says "Navigator"

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 4:58 AM

Reply to this message

"I don't think I've ever heard anyone use "Mozilla Navigator" other than in official mozilla.org announcements;"

I believe the Mozilla installer says "installing Navigator", and the latest versions of Mozilla even go so far as to use the Navigator wheel icon. Hover your mouse over the wheel icon in the bottom left and it says "Navigator".

#99 why? because the community voted.

by joschi

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:43 PM

Reply to this message

the name was chosen by a democratic vote. firebird won. its time to stop this, the deed is done, even if you dont like the name (i'm not big on it), it is the winner and indeed is the name of the browser. deal with it, quietly please :)

#24 Booooooring

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:42 PM

Reply to this message

Firstly, those names are boring.

Secondly, we _have_ to have a distinction between Firebird and the current Mozilla "everything and the kitchen sink app". As Asa has said before elsewhere, we won't switch to Firebird until version 1.5 or so, and we're currently at like .5 (I think). Until then, to keep developers sane, we need a name to differentiate Firebird.

Thirdly, Navigator belongs to Netscape, and it's time we gave it back to them.

#44 "boring"

by mattdm <mattdm@mattdm.org>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 9:19 PM

Reply to this message

Boring is good.

#100 boring lost, firebird won.

by joschi

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:45 PM

Reply to this message

deal.

#98 Codenames Vs Names(TM) -- Web-Lizard

by RabidMunk

Friday April 18th, 2003 2:38 PM

Reply to this message

The problem is that with open development the difference between codenames and branded Names(TM) becomes muddled. If it were just the developers using the name we could call it the Phalus project. The developers of every project could call their project Phalus. Codenames can be cute and they can be reused by everyone within a known context. If I address my wife as "Dear" it does not confuse your wife whom you call "Dear." In fact we can sit at the same table and do it and no one will be confused. However, if I start asking you to tell "Dear" to come home for dinner, you'd be confused. "Just download Dear. It's smaller and faster than my wife, Susan." I managed to miss the first set of nominations. If we need a new set of names I volunteer Web-Lizard and Mail-Lizard as not nearly as confusing as firebird and thunderbird which I will always think of as cars. I can't remember which is which project anyhow. Are they sufficiently cute?

#103 Hmmm

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:03 PM

Reply to this message

Try remembering Phoenix. That very obviously relates to Firebird. A small, fast browser born from the ashes of the monolithic beast that was the Mozilla "everything and its mother" app. That should help.

And no, don't bother nominating new names. We aren't changing.

#112 same attitude again

by leet

Friday April 18th, 2003 9:54 PM

Reply to this message

it happened with the bloat, the splash screen, and now the name. The same we-won't-change-it attitude that ultimately gets dumped/

#123 Re: Codenames Vs Names(TM) -- Web-Lizard

by Xandrex <alexandre.ho_xdxmozillazine@m4x.org>

Sunday April 20th, 2003 4:04 PM

Reply to this message

RabidMunk said :

>not nearly as confusing as firebird and thunderbird which I will always think of as cars.<

Well, that's your problem. Americans may get confused, just like asians were confused with Phoenix which is an appetizer (based of shrimps). I'm confused because the Thunderbirds were great heros for me during my youth. Even Harry Potter may get confused. So what ?

#3 Camaro

by pH7

Thursday April 17th, 2003 12:51 PM

Reply to this message

Rename Firebird to Camaro?

Me thing Camino should be name camaro but its too late now.

#29 Camaro gets my vote

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:54 PM

Reply to this message

Screw the Firebird name, go with Camaro. I Google'd it with not hits referring to software other than screensavers (googling seems to be the standard by which some of the db ppl chose to research the topic).

-bZj

#101 the vote is done. the name is picked.

by joschi

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:46 PM

Reply to this message

move along.

#105 Heh

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:06 PM

Reply to this message

You're even more brutal than I am. Go boy!

#4 hooray

by joschi

Thursday April 17th, 2003 1:04 PM

Reply to this message

the end near! i really appriciate this turn for the civilized.

#5 Confusion and Damage?

by schapel

Thursday April 17th, 2003 1:34 PM

Reply to this message

From the new article: "[I]nform them of the confusion we see coming from their product's sharing our name and the damage we think that will cause."

I don't see any confusion at all. Has anyone actually been confused so far?

As for "damage", as far as I can tell, the Firebird database project is receiving lots of free publicity. That's beneficial to them, not damaging. Of course, that's why they're raising such a big stink... it gets their name mentioned and they're working it for all they can get.

#7 Re: Confusion and Damage?

by yschimke

Thursday April 17th, 2003 1:59 PM

Reply to this message

You don't think they would be upset that someone takes a name that they have worked behind for a long time. regardless of how many other projects had this name, mozilla has no excuse for not taking a clean name. Except lack of imagination.

Sincerely, Steven Chapel :)

#10 i and many many others disagree.

by joschi

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:25 PM

Reply to this message

they didnt need an excuse, there is nothing wrong with it.

#13 Who cares?

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:56 PM

Reply to this message

They were just as unimaginative when they chose it in the first place.

Boo hoo.

#46 Me

by tuqui

Thursday April 17th, 2003 9:40 PM

Reply to this message

Then you accept that Firebird is "unimaginative"

#47 yeah, it's unimaginative

by luserpete <doane@canada.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 10:43 PM

Reply to this message

on the behalf of BOTH sides

#52 Is thhat what he meant?

by Gunnar

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:10 AM

Reply to this message

I thought he was refering to the fact that another project had the name before the firebird DB, so you could also accusing them of hijacking the name.

#67 Nope

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:03 AM

Reply to this message

I'm saying that anything said about mozilla.org reflects right back on the DB folks.

#77 the right to do it.

by uga

Friday April 18th, 2003 6:57 AM

Reply to this message

What somebody did before doesn't give you the right to do so. They didn't do the right thing, but I hope mozilla does. It's a way to gain some respect from everyone.

#78 Re: Confusion and Damage?

by jogar <greg@supersilly.com>

Friday April 18th, 2003 6:59 AM

Reply to this message

> I don't see any confusion at all. Has anyone actually been confused so far?

I have. Yesterday evening, in a confused stupor, I walked into a Pontiac dealer and asked for a browser. They weren't sure what to say.

They did give me a Coke, though.

#83 Re: Confusion and Damage?

by bwtaylor

Friday April 18th, 2003 10:15 AM

Reply to this message

Confusion? No confusion. Firebird is an RDBMS. Firebird is not a browser. There is no confusion.

Damage? If this continues there will be big time damage. There will be some damage to the Firebird project. There will be massive damage to the Phoenix browser project. I would also expect that people will continually post flames and RDBMS questions to its mail list. I would also expect that people will submit RDBMS bugs to the browser bugzilla. I would expect that someone will fork the browser project, just to rename it. If this happens, I would predict that this version will become very popular, if not more popular than the mozilla run one.

I hope that the Mozilla leaders will be big enough to admit that Firebird is an RDBMS and that they need a new name.

#85 I see

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 10:54 AM

Reply to this message

Well, interestingly, Firebird is also a BBS! But no, it can't be, because the DB that came AFTER it swiped its name! Funny, there's also other Firebird software projects. But oh, they'd better change their names to make the DB folks happy!

This is just nonsense. I hope one day soon y'all will get sick of banging your head against a wall - because that's what you're doing - and go home.

#106 Huh?

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:11 PM

Reply to this message

" There won't be any ports or any stuff like that. It is just a name, if that causes someone to run their own port of Mozilla Firebird, they are welcomed to do so but I count the number of users who will care in the single digits. They can cry in their own little corner of the world."

What does that mean? I don't see where ports have any relevance whatsoever?

Bravo on the rest of your post.

#97 Funny

by cgonyea

Friday April 18th, 2003 2:34 PM

Reply to this message

Your damage paragraph sounds a lot like confusion to me. You need to chill and think logically.

If a Firebird RDBMS user is stupid enough to post a bug on Mozilla's bugzilla, they shouldn't be a Firebird RDBMS user. 99.999% of those interested in databases that use Firebird RDBMS are very computer literate and probably just about all of those could be classified as a computer geek. I would hope for the sake of Firebird RDBMS' users everywhere that their users could tell where the hell to post a bug and the difference between a website for Mozilla and a website for Firebird RDBMS. If they can't, they need an IQ test and should stop using computers.

As for Mozilla users (current and protential), the media, download sites, etc. will all use the name "Mozilla Firebird." Google searches for "Firebird" will probably result in the Mozilla web site and Firebird RDBMS web site sharing the top 2. Clearly labeled (which would be good anyways even if their names were totally different to ensure that they appear in the releveant searches), both web sites could never be confused as supporting a different project then what they really support. If a user really knows what they are looking for, a proper search query will result in links that are almost 100% releveant.

There won't be any ports or any stuff like that. It is just a name, if that causes someone to run their own port of Mozilla Firebird, they are welcomed to do so but I count the number of users who will care in the single digits. They can cry in their own little corner of the world.

#8 Mozilla Navigator?

by cknoll

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:03 PM

Reply to this message

If anyone on the Firebird-DB site is recommending the use of Mozilla Navigator, SHAME ON YOU. There's already another browser out there with the 'Navigator' name in it, and to suggest that Mozilla use the label 'Navigator' for their browser product is complete hypocracy! A Browser is neither a Car, nor a Database, yet there is now 3 things in the world with the Firebird title: Pontiac Firebird, Mozilla Firebird, and Firebird Database (or whatever they call themselves).

But, if they are looking for alternative suggestions (which I don't think they are doing) how about FireHawk and ThunderHawk? It has a nice ring to it.

-Chris

#11 there are many others

by joschi

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:27 PM

Reply to this message

Asa has posted links to at least 5 other *software* projects using the name Firebird. One of which is pre-dates the firebird database even. they are being such hypocrits.

#12 Firehawk? ThunderHawk? TonyHawk!

by tve

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:39 PM

Reply to this message

yep.

#19 Mozilla Browser

by ArnoB

Thursday April 17th, 2003 4:29 PM

Reply to this message

I have read this name before in these threads and i must say that this doesn't sound bad !

Mozilla Browser Internet Explorer Netcape Navigator

That's a very clear/nice list.

#38 ThunderHawk is a browser already

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:48 PM

Reply to this message

<http://www.bitstream.com/wireless/>

Bitstream has a browser for the PocketPC that is called ThunderHawk. So, it would seem that even when trying to differentiate, it's hard not to step on someone's toes.

In other news:

Chevrolet had a version of the S-10 called the "Durango". Does anyone confuse this with the Dodge Durango?

-bZj

#53 There was a Studebaker Hawk

by Gunnar

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:13 AM

Reply to this message

In tow models - Golden Hawk and Silver Hawk

#115 There's already a Pontiac Firehawk

by SuperCharger

Saturday April 19th, 2003 4:57 AM

Reply to this message

Actually, there was a special Pontiac Firebird called the Formula Firehawk. The first couple of years it added a higher output engine and suspension modifications to a standard Firebird Formula. Later years it mainly just added Ram Air induction. And it originally got its name from its tires: Firestone Firehawks.

ThunderHawk was the name of a toy made by Mattel back in the 1980s. Unless you want the possibility of them slapping a lawsuit on Mozilla.org, you don't want to use Thunderhawk either.

My point is I don't think there's anyway to come up with a completely unique name anymore. The English language appears to have started running out of cool names for stuff. We need to start adding cool new words to the language, and fast.

#119 Firestone Firehawk

by mccoskey

Saturday April 19th, 2003 9:28 PM

Reply to this message

I don't think we want to have the same name as a tire.

#120 Mozilla's Quetzaquatl

by VMD

Saturday April 19th, 2003 9:47 PM

Reply to this message

If you are looking for a 'bird' association, how about Quetzaquatl. There are not a bunch of hits when one does a Google search.

#121 Mozilla's Quetzalcoatl

by VMD

Saturday April 19th, 2003 9:54 PM

Reply to this message

I guess it makes a big difference when I spell it right. Now Google has a whole shit load of hits. Oh well. In search of something unique, something Mozilla.

#126 Re: Mozilla Navigator?

by napolj2

Monday April 21st, 2003 4:28 PM

Reply to this message

Hmm... if we have to change from FireBird and ThunderBird, maybe WhiteHawk and BlackHawk? Or perhaps LightHawk, SkyHawk, FireFox, or Raven?

#9 apt-get install firebird

by sab39

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:09 PM

Reply to this message

It appears that 'apt-get install firebird' doesn't actually do anything right now, because you need one of the firebird-something-server packages instead, and firebird-utils. So you "apt-get install firebird", see "Couldn't find package firebird", fall back to "apt-cache search" and find the package you want.

But in a hypothetical future world where "our" firebird has been packaged, anyone doing "apt-get install firebird" expecting a database will be terribly confused. The installation will succeed just fine, but there'll be no database anywhere to be found...

Oh, and it appears that all the firebird-*-server packages have "Source: firebird". So we end up with the confusing situation that the "firebird" binary package is something completely different from the "firebird" source package.

Either that or we call the binary package mozilla-firebird, which only hurts potential users of *this* package, who need to do an apt-cache search where with any other name they could just install it directly.

It's telling that I've never heard of *any* other situation in the history of debian where there was a conflict in the "obvious" package name based on the upstream names. Traditionally, open source really has been above this kind of thing - you Just Don't pick a name that someone else is already using, especially if that someone is also a well-known open source project.

Oh, and to state my credentials - I've been following mozilla since before the source was opened, and wrote the auto-hide feature for the site navigation bar. I've never had any involvement with the FireBird DB project, so if I have any bias it's pro-mozilla not pro-FireBird.

#69 Re: Firebird is already taken.

by STED

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:06 AM

Reply to this message

> But in a hypothetical future world where "our" firebird has been packaged, anyone doing "apt-get install firebird" expecting a database will be terribly confused. The installation will succeed just fine, but there'll be no database anywhere to be found...

All I can say is that if Debian devs are so stupid that they decide to call Mozilla-firebird ONLY firebird, then I will be highly surpriced. You are trying to find a problem where non exsists.

> or we call the binary package mozilla-firebird, which only hurts potential users of *this* package

Are you so ignorant in these issues and of the future of Mozilla that you don't know even know that moz will be split up into standalone parts? Please read up on the basics stuff like the roadmap before suggesting what Mozilla should do... Right now you are just adding spam.

#125 Re: Firebird is already taken.

by sab39

Monday April 21st, 2003 2:40 PM

Reply to this message

I don't understand what you're suggesting.

Surely if mozilla is going to be split up into standalone parts, one of which is "firebird", then the *last* thing you want is to have to *always* stick the word "mozilla" in front of it to disambiguate.

For the same reason that I don't say "mozilla chatzilla" to refer to my IRC client of choice, and why I find it annoying to refer to "mozilla mailnews" or "mozilla browser" to refer to my mail client and browser. I'd much rather refer to just "chatzilla", "thunderbird", and "firebird". Especially when these are distributed as standalone packages and not one monolithic source tarball.

I don't say "KDE Konqueror" or "OpenOffice OpenWriter" or "Microsoft Internet Explorer" (usually) or "Sun Java". Why force me to use an unnatural way of speaking when I want to refer to Mozilla's browser?

My problem with firebird isn't to do with trademarks or the theory that it will confuse users of either product. My problem is that it creates a naming conflict in my own brain and forces me to always have to be explicit about which one I mean, whether in my own thoughts or when I'm talking or writing to others. And it's *not* always obvious from context: I write database-driven server-side web applications, and if I'm asking in a public forum about a particular problem I'm having and they say "are you using Firebird?", the question could legitimately refer to either product. I can certainly think of situations where it's not obvious whether a problem is on the server or client side (eg if the page load simply hangs on a particular operation). I don't use either of those products for development now, but I do use mozilla as my primary browser and I guess I'll be moving to "firebird" when it becomes the main recommendation of the mozilla project, and it's not inconceivable that I'd move to an open source database in the future.

I'm not saying Mozilla doesn't have a legal right to use the name. I'm not even saying that Mozilla doesn't have a moral "right" to use the name, although I think that's questionable, and I'd hoped when the name was first mentioned that the existence of a conflict would cause Mozilla developers to take the common sense approach of just picking another name. I just think that the Mozilla project should be more courteous to another open source project and take community feelings into consideration when picking a name. That's all.

(As I said before, I have a longtime involvement with mozilla and some code checked into it, and have never even USED the FireBird database. So my natural bias goes towards Mozilla, not the other firebird project. Historically I've usually watched (and occasionally, by advocacy, helped) mozilla make the "right" decisions, technically, ethically, and otherwise. I'm just disappointed that this time they appear not to be doing so, and I hope they'll still change their minds.)

#14 confused...

by luserpete <doane@canada.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 2:58 PM

Reply to this message

did asa actually have anything to do with selecting the name? i thought he was just the messenger.

#15 Please, organize a *Contest*

by uga

Thursday April 17th, 2003 3:29 PM

Reply to this message

I think the best solution will be to find an even better name? Hey, it's not impossible, and I think I have some better names myself! I find firebird a ridiculous name anyway (reminds me of a cartoon: childish and stupid, nothing I would mix my business with. I don't think that's the idea you have from mozilla...)

Just organize a contest so that people can send new proposed names. Then, choose the best 10 ones making sure there's nothing similar around with the same name. And then organise a public poll with them. Agreed?

In order for this to succeed, the contest and the poll should be as open as possible, so please I would announce it in any possible news sites (lwn, pclo, linuxtoday, linuxcompatible...)

#23 No

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:39 PM

Reply to this message

We already went through that. If there were a legitimate reason to go through that nightmare again, we would, but there isn't.

#31 Re: No

by uga

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:07 PM

Reply to this message

I don't think you actually went through that....

a) I myself, never heard of any contest for the name. That probably means you decided it among you the developers mainly. b) There was no poll to choose the best name c) You didn't check if the name actually existed.

So... _what_ from the suggestion that I gave was actually the thing that you went through? Sorry to say this, but nothing.

Actually, if you went through a nightmare, that's because you didn't do it open enough. People would have noticed this problem earlier. There would be better and more choices to choose from, and you wouldn't have to decide it yourselves. People would choose, letting you with the only strong "effort" of announcing it.

#34 Yes we did

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:18 PM

Reply to this message

We have a forum poll somewhere with over 2000 posts. We also had a poll here at Mozillazine, and I voted for Firebird. Firebird was the name with the largest percentage of votes.

Also, AOL Legal DID make sure the name wasn't taken by another browser. That's all they needed to do.

#36 Sorry, I didn't see it.

by uga

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:28 PM

Reply to this message

I'm sorry then. I didn't see the poll. I would have appreciated a lot that you had posted it in several news sites for that matter though. I read everyday those news sites that I mentioned (appart from some others), and I had no clue until the new official name got out.

Anyway, I hear comments here that say these names are only for the development period, something like a codename. I that's true, I think that could bring the peace back. Could you do an official statement abou it in <http://www.mozilla.org>? I think people is more and more confused every moment that goes through.

#91 Re: Sorry, I didn't see it.

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:36 PM

Reply to this message

Maybe they should CC all <drivers@mozilla.org> to you, so you can approve of anything that gets checked in?

-bZj

#117 They said "public", you know?

by uga

Saturday April 19th, 2003 9:11 AM

Reply to this message

I'm not talking about the development of Mozilla. I'm talking about choosing a name that was supposed to be "public". Look it up in the dictionary, and probably you won't find "something that is privately done inside the working group".

I'm not implying that you should have done this thing. I'm only saying that if you say it was public, you are actually lying. When something is publicly announced, it's usually noticed by people. This thing wasn't until the official crappy announcement. I'm still waiting for an official explanation of these names: are they the definitive names, or just codenames? Not even you the mozilla developers seem to know it. I like that "publicness" in an "Private Open Source " project.

#37 Re: Yes we did

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:47 PM

Reply to this message

"We have a forum poll somewhere with over 2000 posts. We also had a poll here at Mozillazine, and I voted for Firebird. Firebird was the name with the largest percentage of votes."

There was never an official poll. There were unofficial ones but the final decision on the browser name rested with the project leads. To what extent they were influenced by the opinion of the Mozilla community, I don't know.

Alex

#32 See it.

by uga

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:16 PM

Reply to this message

Please notice that I have nothing against mozilla. I'm daily user of mozilla, and sometimes phoenix. But I think this is clear:

If you don't change the name, I smell trouble:

*Two projects with the same name=flamewars *Mozilla has been already rated down enough for the bad management, so I don't think more flames is necessary especially at this moment *People is getting annoyed, that Mozilla is still called "Mozilla", Phoenix is still "Phoenix" and you are already flaming, when nobody still has changed the name.

I find this pretty stupid, even more than what XFree guys are doing right now. If you find them stupid, think why, and then look at yourselves.

There are many more names, better ones. This is a nonsense war that is just damaging your image all over the Open Source community.

"There is no more blind than the person who doesn't want to see"

Regards

U.

#72 Re: se it

by STED

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:21 AM

Reply to this message

> when nobody still has changed the name.

Um, are you really this clueless? The name HAS changed... It was posted on the newspage a few days ago.

Mozilla-FireBird & Mozilla-Thunderbird are the new names...

#75 Re: Re: see it

by uga

Friday April 18th, 2003 6:41 AM

Reply to this message

Yeah I know. But the clueless guy seems to be you instead, since announcing it on the news site doesn't mean it changed.

Until right _now_ there was no soft released under those names. All downloads where "mozilla 1.4", or "phoenix 0.5" or whatever.

Things changed right now, though. I saw the official change to Firebird stuff. Weee! We have the first stupid name :-)

#122 Re: Re: Re: see it

by STED

Sunday April 20th, 2003 9:25 AM

Reply to this message

> But the clueless guy seems to be you instead, since announcing it on the news site doesn't mean it changed.

In this case it does, and if you would have bothered to read any of the previous threads in either the forum or this talkback you would have already known this. But I guess ironically you are to buzzy with prooving what you stated yourself in this thread "There is no more blind than the person who doesn't want to see" :P

#76 Re: Re: see it

by uga

Friday April 18th, 2003 6:47 AM

Reply to this message

Argh! You see the confusion you are causing guys? No, the announcement is of the Firebird database 1.5...

So... until somebody codes it in, still the Name HAS NOT changed. It's still Mozilla & Phoenix. Anyway, I love these names :-)

#17 Debian Experience

by ncm

Thursday April 17th, 2003 4:15 PM

Reply to this message

Actually, the Debian Project does have experience with a couple of other name conflicts. Somebody packaged OpenSSH as "ssh", as a replacement for the common progenitor of OpenSSH and the proprietary version. It was a mess when SSH started promoting its trademark rights. Also, we have "epiphany", a game, and "epiphany-browser", the latter a Gecko-based offshoot of Galeon. <p> Name conflicts stink, and there's no excuse for them. Shame on somebody.

#18 How much does it matter?

by jesse <jruderman@hmc.edu>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 4:19 PM

Reply to this message

When Firebird replaces Mozilla in a few months, will the name "Firebird" still be used, or will it become "Mozilla" at that point? Is "Firebird" more a product name or a temporary codename?

#20 Screw this.

by Desmodromic

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:19 PM

Reply to this message

This is bull. If Microsoft pulled something like this, a bunch of you open-source weenies would be storming Slashdot with signs, torches and pitchforks denouncing the unfriendly rule of a malevolent dictator. Because this is Mozilla though, a bunch of posts go up calling for reasonable action and logical thought, not to mention calling for the FirebirdSQL team to protest in a respectful manner. One Mozilladork even goes and posts that because FirebirdSQL has 0 percent market share, well, that's just tooooo bad.

Screw the people behind this. They're twits that apparently couldn't handle the seemingly reasonable task of arriving at a name that was original (meaning that it wasn't before used by an automobile company for a popular model), creative (meaning that it didn't absolutely have to do with some kind of mythical flaming avian), and fair (meaning that they didn't decide to step on people's toes just because they finally got shoes big enough to do it). This just proves that software developers in this space are all competing for the same pie and that ultimately it all comes down to who has the power to pull what stunt they want to pull. Mozilla's no better than Microsoft, they're just smaller.

And the only thing more annoying than a bunch of jerks is a bunch of smaller jerks.

#26 Sniff, sniff: I smell a troll...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:46 PM

Reply to this message

Go troll elsewhere, please.

And actually, Firebird has a lot to do with a flaming avian, i.e. a Phoenix, because it's a small, fast browser being raised from the ashes of the giganto, monolithic "everything and the kitchen sink" app we are finally putting to rest soon. We had to change from Phoenix because another _browser_ had that name; Firebird was open.

#51 Re: Sniff, sniff: I smell a troll...

by Desmodromic

Thursday April 17th, 2003 11:48 PM

Reply to this message

A troll would be an attempt merely to garner responses and I don't give a rat's ass. To tell the truth, what I hate is all the OSW's (open-source weenies) constantly harping on the evils of very big, and very proprietary, business when, as soon as the opportunity arrives, they use the same tactics in their own project management, which is every bit as rude and inconsiderate as when the large companies do it. However you slice it, however it's justified, it just comes down to "we did it because we frickin' could, live with it".

My ass has more moral superiority.

#68 You'll live, I promise

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:05 AM

Reply to this message

Your premise is based on mozilla.org doing something wrong, and we didn't. Luckily, mozilla.org cares about your views as little as I do.

#133 That's blatantly clear

by Desmodromic

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 1:43 PM

Reply to this message

That Mozilla cares little about the views of its users and customers has been made abundantly clear, but thanks for highlighting that point. It's been previously reflected when the development team just dumps one release target's list of bugs to a later release target so they can release a version number. But now they have something else in common with Microsoft. It's in impressive record they're racking up, and I appreciate you clarifying that.

That you fail to admit that Mozilla did something wrong is, well, right in line with legions of other wrongdoers who have claimed to have done nothing wrong, so congratulations on toeing the line of mediocrity, Kovu. You're right where you should be. The fact that some AOL legal flunkie said this was okay doesn't make it a right move. It doesn't even make it a defensible one. It just makes it a good bet from AOL's legal standpoint.

#71 bird & dinosaurs

by STED

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:17 AM

Reply to this message

> And actually, Firebird has a lot to do with a flaming avian, i.e. a Phoenix, because it's a small, fast browser being raised from the ashes of the giganto, monolithic "everything and the kitchen sink"

In fact FireBird is even a more fitting name then that, since the evolutionists no longer speak of the Dinosaurs dying out, but instead evolving to smaller winged creatures aka birds.

Thus we have the big lizard evolving into the small agile bird... and even in the form of a firebird (aka phoenix) rising from the very ashes (code) of the big dino.

I have a hard time imagening a name that would be more fitting the firebird (and other bird's for other moz components).

#30 Re: Screw this.

by bzbarsky

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:04 PM

Reply to this message

> This is bull. If Microsoft pulled something like this

So if microsoft code-named something "Firebird" people would object?

I think people are missing the fact that the real shipping versions of these products are _NOT_ likely to be "Firebird" and "Thunderbird". Those are just names to give them for now while they are being developed...

#35 Please do an official statement then.

by uga

Thursday April 17th, 2003 6:23 PM

Reply to this message

>Those are just names to give them for now while they are being developed...

So why don't you write it down in your dear webpages? This would definetely stop all the flamewars!

Please write it down in <http://www.mozilla.org> and <http://www.mozillazine.org>

I bet you'll stop this thing, and the whole community will kiss you guys (And I should also, since I wouldn't like that awful name :-)

#61 Re: Re: Screw this.

by gbukovics <spenot@spenot.hu>

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:53 AM

Reply to this message

If this is the case, I have to conclude that mozilla.org has serious communication problems.

The last two major announcements about the Mozilla project both caused major confusion, and now public uproar.

First, there was the XPFE vs Toolkit thing in the roadmap, which - as I recall - not even some Mozilla developers understood completely.

Now, Firebird vs Firebird.

As I see it, the root of the problem is inadequate communication by mozilla.org. Public announcements should be made totally unambiguous. The writers of such announcements shouldn't assume anything about the reader's knowledge about the projects mentioned.

In the first case the writer (Brendan Eich, if I recall correctly) assumed everybody knows exactly what Phoenix is, used the term XPFE, which is just about the most ambiguous term in the history of Mozilla, and used the term Toolkit without adequately defining it. Most people, including me, have thought XPFE was just an umbrella term for XUL+JS+XPCOM, and the roadmap lead quite a lot of people to believe that these technologies are going to be abandoned.

Now, the name Firebird was announced by Asa Dotzler without pointing out that it's just a codename. The announcement should have explicitly mentioned the Firebird RDBMS project, and that there will be no confusion in the future, because for mozilla.org Firebird is just a codename like Seamonkey that isn't used in public releases at all. Mentioning the name suggestion thread, the MozillaZine poll, and how they've influenced the decision (if at all) would have also been advantagous.

So in my view, Mozilla.org should really be more careful when writing public announcements. Perhaps review from non-developers would help avoid confusion and outrage.

Gabor Bukovics

PS. This was meant to be constructive criticism. I apologize if it didn't come through as such. I have the utmost respect for everyone I'm "blaming" in this post and I'd like to take this opportunity to thank them for their work. And I know quite well that you have absolutely nothing to do with this, Boris. :)

#92 Re: Re: Re: Screw this.

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:48 PM

Reply to this message

I understand your point,s and agree with them to some extent. But, there are small flaws.

I would not see any reason to tell you about Garth Brooks if I was sending a Press Release to a country music station. If that PR ended up at a hard rock station, they shouldn't get upset about it. They should disregard it, or do research on it. My point being that these "public announcements" are meant for mozilla people, and they understand most of the info contained within. Those who don't understand it should do some research before getting in a huff.

-bZj

#110 Re: Re: Re: Re: Screw this.

by gbukovics <spenot@spenot.hu>

Friday April 18th, 2003 9:05 PM

Reply to this message

Key word: "should". ;)

The announcements might be *meant* for Mozilla people, but Mozilla is one of the most important open source / free software projects. Consequentially, such news will inevitably end up on sites like Slashdot. Most Slashdot readers (and editors!) don't like to research subjects before forming an opinion.

As for the Firebird RDBMS project, these matters should have been discussed with them before mozilla.org announced the new name. And I disagree with Asa: although I've personally never heard of this project (I've certainly heard of Interbase), it appears to be the largest open source project named Firebird. As such, it is the one that is most affected by the sudden appearance of another, possibly even larger Firebird. Telling them beforehand that "Firebird" is only meant to be an internal codename would have prevented the e-mail campaign.

PS. It's 4:44am here, so this post might or might not have made any sense. In the latter case, please ignore.

#114 Re: Re: Re: Screw this.

by bzbarsky

Saturday April 19th, 2003 12:24 AM

Reply to this message

> If this is the case, I have to conclude that mozilla.org has serious communication problems.

Agreed. Part of the problem is that people vetting the documents tend to have the same blind spots as the authors (a number of people saw the roadmap before it became public, but all of them had a firm grasp on the difference between xpfe/ and toolkit/, and apparently none noticed that this could be confusing...)

#65 Why internal codename is so important?

by vnv

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:00 AM

Reply to this message

>Those are just names to give them for now while they are being developed...

I got the same impression from a number of Asa's postings. It seems that 'Firebird' to-be-brand does not play significant role in planned mozilla.org promotion strategy. But there's the point I'm not getting - if this is going to be just an internal codename, why not simply change it, putting an end to this regrettable conflict within the free software community? Probably, the issue could be resolved simply by communicating in clear and unambiguous way the idea of 'internal codename only' to the Firebird DB guys and to the rest of the world. But if it won't, setting personal and collective egos aside, I see no rational reasons for not changing the name. I personally would consider this as a sign of wisdom, not weakness.

I'm quite a pro-Mozilla guy. In my spare time I've translated 90% of Mozilla help to Russian and written a couple of articles about it. I don't have anything to do with Firebird DBMS. And it is my honest belief that it is mozilla.org - my favorite free software project - that would benefit from stopping this conflict ASAP.

#40 Re: Screw this.

by luserpete <doane@canada.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 7:03 PM

Reply to this message

FirebirdSQL's name wasn't original either. FirebirdBBS is and older project than they are.

#22 Why can't we be friends?

by minh

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:32 PM

Reply to this message

Why can't we all just get along. Let's make a compromise. Let's share the Firebird name and cross promote. This is a very diplomatic and sensible approach. The Firebird DataBase people can say they use ONLY Firebird Browser and Mozizens will support Firebird as the official Mozilla database app. Lets configure the mozilla project to use Firebird DB.

#27 Hmm

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:48 PM

Reply to this message

I had thought it would be cool if the Firebird DB folks made a Mozilla-based front end to their DB, but they don't seem to want to go that route. If they did, we would be more than happy to talk to them, I'm sure. But we are not changing the name.

#90 That's no compromise

by kentfx

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:32 PM

Reply to this message

I don't understand why one piece of software would want to call itself the same name as another piece of software. "Minh" has suggested that a reasonable compromise would be for your two products to share the name and cross-promote. Why? What is this all about? (Has anyone there thought of calling the product "Explorer"? It's really quite a lot better than either Mozilla OR Firebird...)

#93 Re: That's no compromise

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:51 PM

Reply to this message

But don't the db guys already have aproduct called "FirebirdExplorer"?

-bZj

#96 You're right

by kentfx

Friday April 18th, 2003 2:29 PM

Reply to this message

You're right. FirebirdExplorer's taken the software world by storm. Hm. How about Opera (Formerly-Known-as-Mozilla)? Instead of versions we could go through Puccini, Verdi, Wagner... ("Did you hear? The new Mozart Opera is out!") That's the ticket.

#107 EH wrong answer

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:15 PM

Reply to this message

Opera is another WEB BROWSER. The whole reason to switch from Phoenix was because ANOTHER WEB BROWSER already had that name.

Look, if you want to bitch, bitch to the Firebird folks about "victimizing" Firebird BBS. I am sick to death of this argument, and I've said elsewhere, you're banging your head against a wall. Feel free to stop, or die bleeding.

#25 IBPhoenix?

by smkatz

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:43 PM

Reply to this message

Just a question? But isn't it really funny that the company shares our former name, and sponsors a project that uses the new name (before us.)

Why isn't Phoenix bios on them?

(note.. I don't want them to be.. just asking.)

and why didn't firebirddb get the trademark?

I think that they might have a case since they were here before us.

I am only speaking in legalities.

Sam

#28 My guess...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 5:51 PM

Reply to this message

Firstly, IBPhoenix is the name of their organization, not a browser.

Secondly, it's got IB attached to the front of it.

I don't know why they didn't get the trademark if they didn't; I'm not sure if it would apply to only databases if they did, but that'd be my guess. Anyone know anything different? I'm not a lawyer, much less a trademark lawyer, by any stretch of the imagination.

#39 Whatever

by Tanyel <tanyel@straightblack.com>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 7:02 PM

Reply to this message

I think, if Microsoft created any product and called it Mozilla, every Mozilla advocate would be as angry and outrageous as the Firebird database people have ever been, especially after people started searching the Internet for "Mozilla" and reached Microsoft webpages.

#41 Re: Whatever

by asa <asa@mozilla.org>

Thursday April 17th, 2003 8:01 PM

Reply to this message

Mozilla is not a commonplace English word already used by a large number of disperate but peaceful and happily co-existing software projects. Firebird is a commonplace English word already used bt a large number of disperate but happily co-existing software projects. Many Firebird sofware projects was fine and good bug many+1 is outrage?

--Asa

#54 Re: Re: Whatever

by lsces

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:49 AM

Reply to this message

Asa - since you will not answer my private email, I will try again here. I have a meeting with customers I have been trying to convert to Firebird from SQLServer - I've been at it for 6 months. OK the publicity is good, BUT if the conflict had not been reported, then I could have been in a position where the people I am talking to say "Firebird" isn't that the new Mozilla browser" YOU may not have a problem there but I do. DID you even bother to search for a conflict before using the name, or have all the other objections you now raise been found since this blew up? I am happy with Firebird and will continue to use it. I've 20 years of my live saved because it came into existance - because Borland were going to kill Interbase, and if I get any problems because of you using the name that I will deal with them at the time, but some common curtisy would not go a miss.

#124 Re: Re: Re: Whatever

by beg_ne

Sunday April 20th, 2003 7:36 PM

Reply to this message

I'm really getting tired of trolls from the Firebird Database community and developers.

The scenarios cooked up are so imaginative, yet so completely lack any sense of logic you really have to wonder about these people.

Lets take the post i'm replying to for example. The person stated that "I have been trying to convert to Firebird from SQLServer - I've been at it for 6 months". Given that the poster has had *20 years of his life saved* because of this project he has no doubt told his customers all about the product and its merits and probably its rich history and how its come into existence.

Also apparently his customers are very savvy as not only are they supposedly familiar with a project as obscure as Mozilla(and when it comes to browsers pretty much anything other than IE can be considered obscure to the vast majority of people out there) but they are also up on current events as they would be familiar with the Firebird name even if, "the conflict had not been reported".

Then by some unexplainable event these customers suddenly become blathering computer-illiterate bafoons, yet still maintaining their knowledge of the Mozilla Firebird project, and they become utterly confused why the poster would want to replace their database server with a web browser.

I guess then would come in the damage part as the Customers would then at this point sever all ties with the poster, as they wouldn't want to be doing business with someone who would try to replace their database server with a browser.

Atleast thats what i could gather from the post.

I guess the Firebird Database people have to resort to these nonsensical scenarios to try and convince the the general population(of people who actually care about things like open source web browsers and RDBMS) that they are somehow right or have some claim to the Firebird name even if they done have a legal claim to it.

Unfortunately as I see it they don't have any claim to the Firebird in any sense. They don't have a legal claim as stated above.

I also don't think they have any kind of moral or ethical claim to it because they used it "first". Especially when THEY HAVE NOT USED IT FIRST.

Firebird is not a word they invented or have any claim to making. It's a generic word and they seemingly made no effort to make their project unique as they do not attach their organization name to use(such as Mozilla will be referring to Firebird as "Mozilla Firebird" not just "Firebird"). Why didn't the Firebird database people call it "FirebirdSQL" that would be a unique name and would cause no confusion with any other Firebird project as the community would call it "FirebirdSQL" instead of just "Firebird"(And for any trolls who might want to say, "But people would just call it 'Firebird' anyway", how many people to you see refer to "MySQL" as just "My"? :P)

Now back to them not being first, i'll use the Firebird BBS project because they are another OpenSource project that was using the Firebird name before the database people. I believe it was one of the Developers of the the Firebird database project that posted to Mozillazine that that didn't count since the project was in Chinese and based in the ROC.

That statement is complete BS IMO, the Firebird BBS project name is itself in english, even if the software may not(i'm not sure). Since the Firebird Database people have no legal claim to the name it is moot wether or not a project is based in the ROC or anywhere else in the world. Unless the Firebird database people are trying to infer that only projects based out of english speaking countries matter?

I guess since the Firebird database people know they can't "win" based on any kind of logical thinking they will simply make enough noise until people fall in line with their thinking.

#55 Re: Whatever

by eloki

Friday April 18th, 2003 1:12 AM

Reply to this message

"Firebird is a commonplace English word"

What does firebird mean then?

#56 Re: Re: Whatever

by lsces

Friday April 18th, 2003 1:23 AM

Reply to this message

"Firebird is a commonplace English word"

What does firebird mean then?

In the context of browsing, MY Firebird Browser browses my Firebird database, MY Mozilla Browser browses my document database

No confilict?

#62 Firebird - commonplace or invented

by vnv

Friday April 18th, 2003 4:04 AM

Reply to this message

Just a question - can somebody explain to a non-native speaker if 'firebird' is invented or commonplace word, and if it is the latter - what does it mean. I did not find it in my brand new 1600 pages thick Longman dictionary, in a couple of lesser dictionaries and in the Merriam-Webster Online Thesaurus.

#74 it's both

by STED

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:34 AM

Reply to this message

It's an old invented word meaning the same a phoenix and is quite commonplace if nothing else becuse there was a well known car model produced with the name.

#116 Re: Re: Whatever

by IsoSchi <martin_mozillazine@beertent.org>

Saturday April 19th, 2003 5:59 AM

Reply to this message

The Oxford English Dictionary (oed.com - you'll need a subscription to get in) cntains firebird as a word:

1. a. A bird which stays by or hovers round the fire (quot. 1593). b. (See quot. 1865.)

1593 Tell-troth's New Y. Gift 12 This weather-beaten fieres-bird. 1865 TYLOR Early Hist. Man. ix. 252 The story of the fire-bird..a bird which pecked at it [a tree] and made fire come forth.

2. a. U.S. A popular name of the Baltimore oriole, Icterus galbula. b. A kind of bee-eater.

Martin

#42 oh whatever

by morg

Thursday April 17th, 2003 8:16 PM

Reply to this message

People, what the heck ever.

You sound like a bunch of school kids. "My code name is 'Firebird.'" "You can't be 'Firebird,' I thought of it first! Whaaaaah!"

Besides, who would name a database "Firebird"? That sounds like a name for a sports car, something like a web browser that everyone enjoys and actually wants to have. A database engine is more like a dump truck. As long as it runs and runs, that's all that matters. No one is going to sit around and compose poetry about a dump truck.

You know what? Firebird the database engine should get a new name. It's not like they've even done much for the community. OTOH, without the Mozilla Project and now Firebird (TM) and Thunderbird (TM) the Linux desktop would be a joke. Our project is a lot more important than the database.

#50 Poetry?

by Desmodromic

Thursday April 17th, 2003 11:34 PM

Reply to this message

<< No one is going to sit around and compose poetry about a dump truck. >>

Are *you* going to sit around and compose poetry about your browser? Because, if so, you're like the "comic-book guy" on the Simpsons, and you should probably refrain from human contact.

However, name choice is important in a competitve space, so your "what-the-heck-ever" response is just naive. If it wasn't important Mozilla wouldn't take their community-friendly "so sue us" response to this.

And just because *you* don't understand why someone might name a database "Firebird" doesn't invalidate their choice of name. Anyone could take your attitude. I mean, why should anyone care about the opinions of some dork that writes poetry to his Web browser?

#60 Don't feed the trolls...

by Waldo

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:48 AM

Reply to this message

"Our project is a lot more important than [yours]?"

This is like, what, a deliberate attempt to piss everyone off?

#57 Ahem!

by jeremyn

Friday April 18th, 2003 2:30 AM

Reply to this message

Why don't we give those who started it a few emails requesting that they stop their pathetic campaign? <http://www.ibphoenix.com/…enix&page=ibp_contact> <aharrison@ibphoenix.com>, <preeves@ibphoenix.com>, <pcisar@ibphoenix.cz>, <hborrie@ibphoenix.com>, <pbeach@ibphoenix.com> It may seem like an immature response, but it's just that- a response to their tactics.

#58 Re: Ahem!

by AlexBishop <alex@mozillazine.org>

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:08 AM

Reply to this message

"It may seem like an immature response, but it's just that- a response to their tactics."

Exactly. So don't do it.

Alex

#80 Re: Re: Ahem!

by lsces

Friday April 18th, 2003 9:18 AM

Reply to this message

I'd also be happy to be added to that list - <lester@lsces.co.uk> - at least anybody who mails me direct will get an answer - I'm still waiting for a number from Mozilla members!

#94 Re: Re: Re: Ahem!

by Down8 <down8@yahoo.com>

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:57 PM

Reply to this message

If you had a bajillion enraged geeks filling your inbox with "CHANGE THE NAME OR I'LL H4X0R J00!!1", you'd take a while to respond too.

-bZj

#113 if phoenix's for end0users

by leet

Friday April 18th, 2003 10:34 PM

Reply to this message

I guess too many Moz people are either too young or immature. The they-do-it-too excuse gets old pretty fast.

#59 Magellan?

by crash

Friday April 18th, 2003 3:24 AM

Reply to this message

If you're looking for a new name (again), how about the name of any of the famous explorers?

* Magellan

* Columbus

* Drake

* etc.

#66 Sorry

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:01 AM

Reply to this message

We're not looking for a new name. Day late, dollar short.

#70 Excellent

by filochard

Friday April 18th, 2003 5:12 AM

Reply to this message

This idea of yours I find it excellent.

"Firebird" was such a surprise I just could'nt believe it. To my hears this sounds very, very american.

Long live Magellan, Colombus or whoever !

#95 Re: Magellan?

by simra

Friday April 18th, 2003 2:11 PM

Reply to this message

Well, clearly it would have to be Shackleton. Phoenix, Shackleton, back from the dead, get it?

#81 I think all this renaming business is silly

by kollivier

Friday April 18th, 2003 9:28 AM

Reply to this message

The name Firebird is nice and all, but it could cause confusion. If two (or more) software products use the same name, it is likely that some people will think there is some affiliation between them. Firebird is not a trademarked name (as far as I am aware), but neither is it common.

Seriously, what the heck is wrong with Mozilla Navigator, Mozilla Mail and News, Mozilla Composer, etc.? I think those names are very easy to understand, and they actually give some real clue as to *what they do*. No one complained about those names while Netscape used them. Furthermore, there is no need for Mozilla to rename projects every time there is a major development change. Otherwise, we can't expect any Mozilla product to keep it's name for more than, say, 3 years.

Phoenix/Firebird is the new Mozilla Navigator. It's that simple. Just call it that and we can all get on with our lives and everyone is happy. (Except possibly for folks who need cool names, whom I encourage to immediately rename their icons and source/binaries after download. Voila! Mozilla Firebird is reborn!)

I highly doubt that Netscape is going to use those names in its suite anyways, so really, what is the point of all this?

#82 Please...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 10:06 AM

Reply to this message

Please don't reinvent the wheel on this. All of your arguments have been offered many, many times before in previous posts, especially at <http://www.mozillazine.or…alkback.html?article=3082> and we're all weary answering these same questions over and over again.

#84 But you aren't...

by kollivier

Friday April 18th, 2003 10:50 AM

Reply to this message

I haven't seen you really *answering* the questions presented. Most of your answers are:

1. It's changed. Deal with it. 2. You should have been involved in the renaming process. 3. Those guys are just whining. 4. We want Firebird to get people 'excited' about the browser.

None of those points answers my particular questions. Except partially #4.

First off, I think this is more an issue of developers not handling public relations issues very well. If firebird is a codename, SAY that publicly. Make the 'release' name Navigator. Get it posted on Slashdot - they'd take it right now, I guarantee. Isn't everyone happy now? Developers can call it firebird in private, but in public postings and releases it's called Navigator - projects do this all the time. Most people *don't* think Firebird is a codename just because the only place it seems to be stated as such is in a response to a response on a message board. Don't expect most people to read every message in a 200 message forum all the time. Everything I've seen that is publicly viewable says that it's being renamed. Period.

Second, you are part of a larger community, and you should respect others in that community. It's not fair to say that "only those who actively participate in Mozilla's development" have a right to comment about the name. Most people DIDN'T know that the names were being changed, and it WASN'T highly publicized. (i.e. I don't remember any mention of it on the Mozilla web site, and I check Mozillazine a couple times a week so I may have missed it.) Thus it's unlikely that the FirebirdSQL folks could have known about the name change or objected at the appropriate time. I'm not saying you need to make sure Slashdot knows of the renaming, but I also don't think it's fair that you say 'too late, it's done' when the Firebird folks object to the name change. Corporations take these kinds of issues seriously, in part because they know it's actually a nice thing to get along with the community and not act stubborn and arrogant. The Mozilla community should also try a little harder to play nicely with others in the open source community. (Even if the initial response by the FirebirdSQL/IBPhoenix folks was somewhat immature - you are right that some people are simply 'jumping on the bandwagon' - it has nothing to do with their original objection.)

Third, making the name change suggested for the 'public releases' lets everyone go back to their business, including coding Mozilla. I think that they can still have their codenames and be 'fired up'. Heck, regardless of the name, there's a major change going on so I think they will be fired up regardless. To not change the name is to simply keep the argument going. Why? To spite the FirebirdSQL/IBPhoenix developers for their immature response? The name change is not earth shattering, and I think it is actually a safe move as Netscape has had those names for a very long time without problems. So why not? Why keep this issue alive? I still don't get it, even after reading through your responses to the many issues posted.

#88 Sigh

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 11:14 AM

Reply to this message

Here are the relevant facts, once again, because you choose not to see them elsewhere:

* The name change process was long, and it's over. We don't want to do it again and we have no reason to. * YOU'RE keeping this issue alive by not dropping it. To infer that the only end to this issue is for us to change the name is arrogant, not us standing by our decision. You and everyone else arguing that we should change the name are, in fact, banging your head against a brick wall. Hopefully at some point you'll stop it, but that's up to you. Soon new stories will post at Mozillazine, this one will fall off the page, and the Mozilla community at large will go on as normal with the name Firebird intact. * We're not doing anything to "spite" anyone. The DB folks are not being harmed any more than the BBS folks were before them; they'll get over it or not. I don't really care. * We don't actually care what the Firebird DB people think of the name change, it's not their product and the change ISN'T hurting them. To quote Asa, they were happy with "many" Firebird software products (including Firebird BBS) that coexisted peacefully when they were the most recently named Firebird software product, but for some reason they have a problem with many +1. Oh well - they'll live. * For the billionth time, it can't be "Navigator" or just "Mozilla browser" because we need to differentiate the old from the new especially while the transition between the two is going on. Once the transition is over, maybe the names will be deprecated, maybe not - I don't know, and I don't really care.

#89 Re: Sigh

by vnv

Friday April 18th, 2003 12:20 PM

Reply to this message

Just to clarify your message: what exactly do you mean by 'we' in this and other postings of yours dealing with the name issue (or non-issue)? On behalf of whom you are making your statements like 'we dont' want' etc.?

#102 That's exactly what I want to know too:

by rsidd120

Friday April 18th, 2003 7:39 PM

Reply to this message

Who is this Kovu? From the tenor of these "we" postings one would imagine it's Mitchell Baker or someone, but somehow I doubt that.

#108 "We" the Mozilla community

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:20 PM

Reply to this message

"We" the Mozilla community, as in, those who actually were around before all this nonsense. As in, those who voted one way or another on the name BEFORE the Firebird DB crew asked the world to come here and spam our community site.

#104 Facts (last post).

by kollivier

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:05 PM

Reply to this message

Well, unfortunately, I doubt you are interested in continuing this further or even in hearing what I have to say, as you are simply restating previous arguments and selectively responding to the points that you wish to (and ignoring others). However, let me clarify a few of the facts you mentioned.

Fact 1: There are other ways to differentiate between old and new products: codenames, version numbers, stable and unstable trees, etc. So it *can* be Navigator, at least for all public documentation and releases; that's just not the way you want to do things. Your argument would necessitate that each time a significantly new version of a software product were to be released, it would have to be formally renamed to denote the change and "avoid confusion". However, Microsoft Windows has been Windows for over 10 years, even though it looks and works nothing like the original Windows. The only name change was with version numbers (or names). Same with Mac OS, and pretty much every major software package in existance.

Fact 2: You can't say that the change won't hurt the Firebird folks - that's an opinion, and one that neglects that Mozilla is a very visible open source project. Much more so than Firebird BBS, which I'd never heard of. If or how much it actually hurts them is anyone's guess. But if they were trying to build, say, brand recognition, it could definitely hurt them. (If some other product, say a search engine software, called itself 'Word' and *became reasonably popular*, Microsoft would be all over those folks. Why? Brand recognition. Even though the name is generic, just like Firebird.)

Fact 3: You don't have to go through the whole naming process again - in fact, my suggestions in previous posts let you keep the names, only as codenames rather than official product names. Navigator, Mail and News, and Composer have been the official names used by Netscape for a long, long time - everyone is familiar with them.

I did not mean to imply that the name change was the only end - just that it would be an immediate resolution to the problem, not to mention one that will not really harm the Mozilla project. (Especially if you get to keep firebird as a codename.) As the issue stands, people could (and probably will) argue this point for quite some time, and with both sides sitting in their corner refusing to budge, it could be a long fight. (Maybe it will disappear, but it seems more - and not less - people are getting involved.) You talk like I'm "with them", but really I want to see both projects moving forward without being harmed. Not to mention I didn't even comment until today, so I'd hardly call myself a 'protester' or whatever. But your responses, in which you say "don't (really) care" several times, makes it look like you (hopefully not the Mozilla community in general) could care less what effects your decisions have on others. It sounds to me like you're saying that you'll only respect (or listen to) those that agree with you. I could be wrong in this, and I really hope I am, but that's the impression I get from the tone of your responses.

Also, again, I've yet to see a formal response from the Mozilla project about this. I'd like to hear an official response from the Mozilla project that anyone who thinks Mozilla should re-consider the naming issue are all "banging our heads against a brick wall." If they say that, then oh well. I think it will be sad if the Mozilla project is to say that, though, for the reasons stated above.

#109 Okay...

by Kovu <Kovu401@netscape.net>

Friday April 18th, 2003 8:32 PM

Reply to this message

I'll respond to your "facts" as you numbered them.

Fact 1: There are ways. We've chosen ours. If you don't like it, I'm sorry.

Fact 2: It's an "opinion" shared by trademark law. mozilla.org ran this through AOL's legal department and came up roses. That law was made to prevent the "harm" you claim we're doing, and yet the law is on our side. If you don't think the law is broad enough (and I've said this elsewhere), write your congressman and take a valium.

Fact 3: You're right, those names are from Netscape. mozilla.org has recently taken a turn to try and not use Netscape trademarks. That's why we changed our splash screen, because it included the Netscape green lizard logo. In short, we're trying to give back to Netscape the trademarks that are theirs.

"I did not mean to imply that the name change was the only end - just that it would be an immediate resolution to the problem, not to mention one that will not really harm the Mozilla project."

And? If someone is feeling down, jumping off a bridge is an immediate resolution to the problem, it doesn't mean it's the right one. We voted on the name, got AOL legal to bless it, and we've already started the wheels in motion. It would do more "harm" to our project to change now than it ever would the DB folks.

If you want formal responses, see Asa's posts. He's a mozilla.org staff member.

#86 WHY OTHER 'FIREBIRD' SHOULD NAMED AS 'FIREBIRD DB'

by erickleung

Friday April 18th, 2003 11:08 AM

Reply to this message

I saw many people rename other FIREBIRD project name as 'FIREBIRD DB'.

I think this is not a proper way to say so because

1. They says that there should be no confusion when two different projects/products have the same name. 2. They show no respect to other people by changine their offical name.

#87 Call it Pfonix

by yancey

Friday April 18th, 2003 11:09 AM

Reply to this message

If we name the new browser Pfonix, then we can use the phrase, "Hooked on Pfonix! Worked for me!"

#111 why not...

by sku

Friday April 18th, 2003 10:02 PM

Reply to this message

Why not firebinky? Thats what I'd call it, and I think you should all listen to me cause I've never had anything to do with anything even mildly related to ... anything! I

#118 Stop

by cgonyea

Saturday April 19th, 2003 8:06 PM

Reply to this message

Stop suggesting names. Mozilla Firebird is picked and that is final. *If* in the future, for whatever reason, the name changing stuff happens again, there will be an announcement about it. Then all the people who feel they must suggest names will be as happy as can be and can jump around like crazy. Until then, STOP suggesting names.

#127 The Firebird DB project deserves respect

by davidwhyte

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 8:11 AM

Reply to this message

The history of the Ffirebird Db project is interesting and I think they have done, and are doing, a great job. They have a very good project and are getting excellent results. As a long time avid Mozilla evengelist, I am stunned, and disapointed by the Mozilla Project's behaviour. If Mozilla keeps the Firebird name I cannot see how it can be anything but bad for the database project.

#128 The Firebird DB project deserves respect

by davidwhyte

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 8:15 AM

Reply to this message

The history of the Ffirebird Db project is interesting and I think they have done, and are doing, a great job. They have a very good project and are getting excellent results. As a long time avid Mozilla evengelist, I am stunned, and disapointed by the Mozilla Project's behaviour. If Mozilla keeps the Firebird name I cannot see how it can be anything but bad for the database project.

#129 The Firebird DB project deserves respect

by davidwhyte

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 8:15 AM

Reply to this message

The history of the Ffirebird Db project is interesting and I think they have done, and are doing, a great job. They have a very good project and are getting excellent results. As a long time avid Mozilla evengelist, I am stunned, and disapointed by the Mozilla Project's behaviour. If Mozilla keeps the Firebird name I cannot see how it can be anything but bad for the database project.

#130 The Firebird DB project deserves respect

by davidwhyte

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 8:16 AM

Reply to this message

The history of the Ffirebird Db project is interesting and I think they have done, and are doing, a great job. They have a very good project and are getting excellent results. As a long time avid Mozilla evengelist, I am stunned, and disapointed by the Mozilla Project's behaviour. If Mozilla keeps the Firebird name I cannot see how it can be anything but bad for the database project.

#131 The Firebird DB project deserves respect

by davidwhyte

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 8:16 AM

Reply to this message

The history of the Ffirebird Db project is interesting and I think they have done, and are doing, a great job. They have a very good project and are getting excellent results. As a long time avid Mozilla evengelist, I am stunned, and disapointed by the Mozilla Project's behaviour. If Mozilla keeps the Firebird name I cannot see how it can be anything but bad for the database project.

#132 The Firebird DB project deserves respect

by davidwhyte

Tuesday April 22nd, 2003 8:16 AM

Reply to this message

The history of the Ffirebird Db project is interesting and I think they have done, and are doing, a great job. They have a very good project and are getting excellent results. As a long time avid Mozilla evengelist, I am stunned, and disapointed by the Mozilla Project's behaviour. If Mozilla keeps the Firebird name I cannot see how it can be anything but bad for the database project.