Firebird Database Project Admin Apologises to for Mailbombing

Saturday April 26th, 2003

In an update to an earlier article, IBPhoenix is reporting that Ann Harrison of the Firebird database project has apologised to Staff for "problems a mailbombing may have caused". The apology was made at the request of the Debian project's Jonathan Walther, who has offered to mediate in the dispute. The article also reports that the Firebird Admins and the FirebirdSQL Foundation are trying to open a more formal channel of communication with

#12 I can see you disagree... :-)

by JuanGonzalez

Sunday April 27th, 2003 1:05 AM

You are replying to this message

As I said, there is a variety of different opinions but, surely, what everyone only hopes is that all this absurd mess will finish soon for good, with a fair solution for all. Tanyel, I remember you were one of the many Mozilla users who opposed the use of "Mozilla Firebird" as the new browser name, to prevent any possible damage to the Firebird database. But since this Friday, with the new branding document, the situation is completely different and much better, most people think. The new name of the browser is simply "Mozilla Browser".

But I see you also disagree pretty strongly about the internal project codename. I'm not sure why Mozilla is keeping "Mozilla Firebird" as a transitional codename. Who knows, maybe a little of pride, maybe still a little of memory of the past flame-mailbombing, or maybe because good names are a bit hard to find, I really don't know. More probably, it's only that it's difficult for the people to see why an internal codename may matter. For example, SeaMonkey is the codename for the current Mozilla suite, and it has been in deep obscurity always for most people outside Mozilla.

I have no decision power in all this affair, as a simple tester. But, if I was a Firebird coordinator, I would be very happy from this Friday, and would forget about the internal codename, it really doesn't matter. And maybe I would take care that it is only used as a codename, of course. On the other hand, if I was a Mozilla coordinator, I would avoid any possible confusion or time loss, and would replace also the transitional codename with any name, for example "NewBrowser", "WebBrowser" or any other random name, like a NASA mission, Voyager or anything, it really doesn't matter, nobody cares about internal codenames, only about public product names. :-)

Concerning your question on Phoenix, it was a public product name, with many users even in pre-1.0 versions, and needed to be replaced because of trademark of another browser. "Mozilla Firebird" was, apart from a codename, a possible product name to replace "Phoenix", another possibility being "Mozilla Browser". But everything changed since this Friday, and the decision has been "Mozilla Browser" as the public browser name. And about the codename, personally I think it doesn't matter much as I said, but the two administrative teams, Firebird and Mozilla, may talk about any details like this. But, why complicate the things more and more time with unimportant points? (Just an opinion).

The TM... Well, I agree with you, and I think probably most people, that the "TM" marks should disappear as soon as possible from the codenames. But, like you and the rest of users and testers here, I can write only my personal opinions, or what we can read in the Mozilla documents. For undocumented details on official positions (like the TMs), please talk to the drivers.

Also, about your point of the public webpages, the goodwill mediator coincides with you <…x&page=ibp_mozilla_jw> . I think the codename is only needed for technical matters (bugzilla, etc.) to avoid confusion with the current browser, but the two teams should talk about these details, at least referring to the main websites (many different people make webpages on Mozilla).

The new branding document says, for instance: "Also, this branding" [Mozilla Browser, Mozilla Mail] "should be found throughout the projects if possible instead of referring to the Firebird and Thunderbird names directly. Project names are transitory." <>

As you can see, the things are completely different now. Of course I don't know any current details, but solutions come from good communication, and I hope -like almost everybody- that the two administrative teams are starting to approach these days, thanks to the goodwill mediator, to talk soon about the rest of details of a fair solution for all.

Well, I've talked too much indeed, sorry. Tanyel, I hope my personal point -or my partisan propaganda- is clear now. Nobody is completely fair and neutral, even if we try. :-)