name Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: John Wang <johncwang(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Advocacy List <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: name Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.
Date: 2007-09-27 18:13:40
Message-ID: 20070927181340.GB28083@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Joshua D. Drake escribió:

> Interesting point but I don't think that would be a problem in general.
> Mainly because as good as we are... we are not Proctor & Gamble ;). Nor
> are we even in the same sector (business/financial etc...).
>
> I like Pg but I would also not be opposed to pgsql, which is extremely
> common.

I think we're trying to find a name for saying out aloud. Both "pg" and
"pgsql" are mostly used in writing.

I respect the idea of not renaming PostgreSQL to Postgres immediately,
just like I support the idea of eventually doing it. However, the idea
of dropping Postgres as a name/alias altogether seems blind and dumb.
Blind, because it ignores the fact that many people already use that
name. Dumb, because there is a lot of support (granted, not consensus)
for actually using it as the official name.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
Postgres Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-09-27 18:24:47 Re: name Re: Dropping postgres as a whole.
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-09-27 18:10:26 Re: Using Postgres as an alias