From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | suga(at)netbsd(dot)com(dot)br |
Cc: | Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
Date: | 2002-07-08 12:05:28 |
Message-ID: | 20020708090516.O11619-100000@mail1.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 8 Jul 2002 suga(at)netbsd(dot)com(dot)br wrote:
>
> > That's obvious. Since QL means "query language," "Postgres QL" would
> > refer to the old, QUEL-derived query language that Postgres used before
> > it was ripped out and replaced with SQL, right?
> >
> > "Postgres" is simple, people use it anyway, and everybody now knows that
> > Postgres uses SQL instead of its own query language now, so I think it
> > would be a very good to just switch back to to that. With the demise of
> > Great Bridge, we even have the postgres.org domain name free for this
> > now.
>
>
> So obvious for us, so enigmatic for non-technical people. Also,
> "PostgresQL" could very well be understood as "another kind of SQL", as
> people could read "Postgres Query Language". I agree that "Postgres" is a
> better approach for what is desired. I still would like to know if this is
> really under discussion, I mean, if such change would be possible someday.
No, no more then switching to GPL is an option ...
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Al Arduengo | 2002-07-08 12:15:59 | Re: Date Data Type |
Previous Message | Sam Liddicott | 2002-07-08 10:31:16 | Re: 7.2.1 optimises very badly against 7.2 |