Re: Change the name (was: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL))

Decibel! wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 01:30:54PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > I have downloaded the Advocacy email archive for August and September
> > > and looked at all emails with the subject "naming". I read each email
> > > and totalled the opinions of all the posters. Of course, this is not
> > > scientific but it does represent everyone on advocacy who felt the need
> > > to comment on the thread.
> > >
> > > The totals are 15 for no change and 30 for a change to "Postgres". The
> > > number who favored "PostgresQL" were minimal. If you have additions or
> > > corrections, please email me privately and I will repost the list.
> >
> > Oops, I had a few duplicates in that list. Here is the right one.
> > (Seems I need to use a database with unique constraints.)
> >
> > This shows 70% in favor of a change to "Postgres", so far.
> >
> > Of course, this is not a vote on _how_ to implement the change.
>
> I'm going to go out on a limb here and ask... can we now at least agree
> to change the name to Postgres, stop debating that point, and start
> thinking about *how* to change the name?

Yea, I think that is a limb. People have thrown all sort of ideas on
why/why not to make the change, so I think we need to give more time for
that.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +