| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres" |
| Date: | 2008-04-09 00:53:01 |
| Message-ID: | 10742.1207702381@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
momjian(at)postgresql(dot)org (Bruce Momjian) writes:
> Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres" ---
> seems unnecessary to mention in the FAQ, per discussion on IRC.
This doesn't seem like an improvement in the least. It makes it
appear that Postgres is just a randomly chosen abbreviation that
has no particular historical standing compared to, say, Postgre.
The previous text made it perfectly clear *why* that shortening
is preferred over others.
Why are such politically touchy decisions being taken in an anonymous,
unarchived forum like IRC, anyway? Especially when what *was*
being publicly discussed was an entirely different change?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2008-04/msg00001.php
(Not that I like JD's proposed change better, but at least he
made it in a reasonably well-read forum.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-09 00:55:30 | pgsql: Revert sentence removal from nickname in FAQ. |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-09 00:44:07 | pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres" |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-09 00:56:18 | Re: [HACKERS] pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres" |
| Previous Message | Andrew Chernow | 2008-04-09 00:47:38 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |