🚀 go-pugleaf

"Ben Matterson" <bmatterson@borland.com> wrote in message
news:3AC8FA01.A0A74910@borland.com...
>
>
> Pavel Cisar wrote:
>
> > - doesn't provide paid support for free version
>
> This is not true. We DO provide paid support for the free version. All
> you have to do is *pay*. If you compile and use InterBase 6 Open
> Edition and you wish to buy support for it, we will support you.
> Please note, compiling the IB6 Open Edition is outside the area of
> expertise of InterBase support; we don't know how to do it, so we
> don't claim to support doing it.

There is no evidence that Borland will or will not provide paid support for
OS IB at borland.com or elsewhere. The official stance is not known, but
various Borland employees when asked told that there would not be such
thing. You're the first Borland employee I know about who claims the
opposite, so now I'm puzzled. Anyway, with past experience I'll belive when
it appear in black ink on borland.com.

> > - doesn't provide "certified", paid product with no strings
> > attached (deployment license), i.e. has only free version with
> > no support and "who will use it shall be doomed" at one side,
> > and very expensive, only one supported version on another end.
>
> No, we offer *free* product with "no strings attached". If you need
> support you have to buy it, just like any other product. Once again
> you claim that you cannot buy support for the open source version. If
> you bychance know the source of this incorrect rumor I would I like to
> see about getting the information corrected ASAP.

I'm not talking about paid support here, but about paid product, i.e. the CD
with certified version, printed manuals, ODBC etc. for reasonable price
(<$2000) but without deployment fee. Many shops out there jumped to the IB
bandwagon when it was opened because of the low price tag. Actually, IB
replaced Paradox in many applications since last summer. It's typical that
for that kind of application's the deployment fee is unacceptable. Those
shops are now doomed without support from Borland. They will buy that, but
not at given "circumstances", so they're now heading toward Firebird.

> > - doesn't cooperate with users (community) to improve its
> > core product.
>
> Well, yeah, I'll agree that Borland has been dog slow about involving
> the community. This is one area that we are figuring out, but it's not
> there yet.

Dog slow ? Irresponsive is better description. IB community approached
Borland many times, in public letter, in this groups, by e-mail to
individual persons at Borland (including Jon Arthur). The answer was silence
from the Borland officials. Meanwhile various persons (Borland employees or
persons very close to Borland) downplayed Firebird and IBDI (don't mention
IBPhoenix) in public and alienate individuals from IB community. Did you
know, for example, that Robert Schieck (yes, the patron of Interbase
community at Borland) alienated and ban people in Mers lists to that extent,
that many individuals who served community by their expertise for many years
had to leave that list (they're mostly in IB-support list at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ib-support now) ? Once upon a time it was a
great list with high (volume and quality) traffic, and look at it now, it's
still good but it's only a shadow of its former glory.

> > - doesn't operate in open environment under public scrutiny
> > (don't mention Borland's area at  SourceForge, it's dead in
> > comparision to Firebird).
>
> Borland offers the source code for InterBase at SourceForge. That code
> is being updated. Personally, I understand where one could take issue
> with SourceForge as a code repository.

That wasn't what I mean. At Firebird, anyone can browse the various mailing
list archives or get subscribed to them to simply watch what's going on or
participate. Anyone can send an e-mail to any person (including Jim Starkey)
and get a response ! And people's hands are where they mouth's are.

> > - utilize spin doctors and damage control engineers whenever is
> > criticized for its lack of openess and honesty in communication,
> > or is criticized at all (I don't account that to the low-level
> > staff, they are conditioned and ordered to behave that way).
>
> Which of these things do you accuse me of being? Am I just a symbol of
> Borland? Or do you allow for the possibility that I'm actually a real
> person? Because if you don't, I am not going to come here just to be a
> target for you to snipe at. If you wish to talk to me that's great. If
> you are here to fence with a "spin doctor" or a "damage control
> engineer" then I am going to spend my time some other way.

I didn't count that to you personally, but to various "so called"
Dev.relations people. From my experiance,  Borland technicians are great,
honest people. They're sometimes misinformed about what's going on outside
their realm, that's all. But you know that there're some individuals who're
in charge to "improve" the Borland's picture in the eyes of the "customers".
They're mostly great people to have a chat or share a beer with them, but
one should be very cautious about what they say when they operate in
"corporate mode".

> <snip>
>
> > Ok, Borland has right to operate that way, and there is nothing
> > wrong with it. BUT DON'T TELL US THAT IT'S OPEN SOURCE ! Please,
> > learn about WHAT IS open source and what rules this game has,
> > before you'll defend Borland's steps re. OS.
>
> The InterBase open source project may not be what *you* think an open
> source project should be, but it *is* open source. If you really think
> InterBase is not open source, show me some cites to back up your
> claims. I have a fair understanding of what open source is, and I am
> open to any information you bring to the discussion.

Well, InterBase 6 IS Open Source product, right ? But Borland doesn't play
open source game in business nor developement, does it ?

> One of the elements of a successful open source project is what Eric
> Raymond called the "benevolent dictator", someone to guide the project
> and provide direction.

Yep, you did your homework :) But that dictarorship is a very fragile thing.
Open Source impose true balance of power between the dictator and the crowd.
One shall prove his ability to lead people everyday, otherwise when
discontent reach the critical mass, the fork is imminent. The pure existence
of Firebird is clear sign that there is something wrong with Borland's
leadership.

> In the case of Linux, it was Linus Torvalds.
> For Fetchmail it was Eric Raymond. In the case of InterBase, Borland
> is acting as the "benevolent dictator."

Yep, and that's the problem. The leader should be a real person. He/she
could be an employee / supported by company, but people follow real persons,
not companies. Companies stands and fall, but persons will stay up. Borland
should introduce a foreman for InterBase (Charlie Caro ?) to the community.

> It makes sense because Borland
> already pays a bunch of money to have InterBase developed and QA'ed
> full time.

Actually, it doesn't make sense since IB was released to general public.
Borland has "privileged" position, but it's not a hereditable asset. Borland
have to prove that it's the "right leader". Borland have the InterBase name,
that is the only one asset Borland really posses. Borland has also *some*
advantage on market due to IB integration with development tools and *some*
(but not all) in-house expertise.

> If what you really object to is that Borland is still in
> charge of the InterBase open source project,

No, I don't object. But I want (as many others) that Borland have to
convince me that I should follow his leadership and invest in Borland's
InterBase. Otherwise I'll go elsewhere (Firebird). And I'm still not
convinced that it will do any good for me to support Borland's efforts re.
InterBase. But I'm still open to listen to Borland's arguments and evaluate
his actions.

> InterBase Open Edition,
> then I cannot help you; Borland is in charge of Interbase and we are
> not going to walk away from it.

You're in charge to InterBase name, but definitelly not in charge to the
InterBase code. Anyone can pick it and go forward. Borland is only one from
many (currently two, but who know what future will bring to us).

> I agree that community involvement in
> the project has gotten of to a glacial start, but even glaciers move,
> given time.

Do you really believe that it will ever take off the ground ? I doubt that,
but we'll see. Don't expect that there are eager hordes in front of
Borland's doors, you'll need to convince people to work with you first. Yes,
many are willing to listen to Borland, but Borland is definitely not the
only one game in town, so don't be arrogant. It will not bring you (Borland)
any good.

Best regards and take care
Pavel Cisar