Re: Change the name

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Andy, Ron, Peter, etc.:
>
> > Josh, we simply need to decide if we want to do it or not. Lots of
> > people have volunteered to help (including us), and the implementation
> > project plan can be a team effort of those people.
>
> Ok, that didn't come out right.
>
> To restate:
>
> The next step of this process is NOT a poll. The next step of "should we
> do it or not" is a rough draft of a plan which shows all of the "costs" of
> changing the name and how we're going to meet them, as well as the Pros
> and Cons of changing vs. not changing.
>
> There is no point in even talking further about changing the name of the
> project if we don't have the resources to do the change. There's
> particularly no point in doing a survey of people's uninformed opinions
> about the issue; community members need to see a cost-benefit analysis
> *first,* not after a vote.
>
> In other words, before we take a vote on whether the bike shed should be
> red, we should first check to see if we can afford red paint.
>
> Such a proposal should also include other options like Ron Mayer's very
> sensible 20-minute solution (e.g. "Postgres and Postgre are acceptable
> alternate names").

OK, looks like we now have a list of items to address _if_ we change the
name:

http://developer.postgresql.org/index.php/Postgres

I believe the next step we discussed was to get feedback from the
'general' email list. Correct?

--
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. +