From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres" |
Date: | 2007-10-25 21:25:21 |
Message-ID: | 200710252125.l9PLPL700752@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-docs |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > Woah, let's be very clear here. There was zero agreement to promote
> > > the name postgres. There was agreement to state that Postgres was an
> > > acceptable form of the word PostgreSQL.
> > >
> > > Which I do still agree with, but that is far from "promoting".
> >
> > Here is a thread where I propose the "promoting" idea and general
> > agreement on it:
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00257.php
> >
> > and here is where I think you are agreeing to do such promotion in the
> > FAQ, at least:
> >
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-09/msg00279.php
>
> No. That was me stating that the current FAQ stating that Postgres was
> an acceptable form of PostgreSQL was enough. Which I do still agree
> with.
OK, I misunderstood then. I was asking where to promote it and you were
saying just the FAQ which I thought meant promote usage in the FAQ.
Sorry.
> I have stated that *if* we were going to make wholesale documentation
> changes that we should do it in the form of PostgreSQL, hereafter known
> as Postgres...
>
> I don't like it but I believe it would be a fair compromise.
Yea, I think so. If we make that change we could go until 8.4 beta and
then see how we are doing with making an easily-prounced alias name. We
might need to make no further changes, or we might want to change it
back for some reason.
I will give another 1-2 days for feedback on the "pattern" usage issue.
So far I think everyone so far has said they like just a first mention
of PostgreSQL in the document and then Postgres in the rest of the
document _if_ we are going to do that.
Then I will start a new thread to ask about actually doing that change.
I thought the second-in-paragraph style was minimal because it is like,
e.g. "Bill Cohen was caught stealing. Cohen was seen under the bushes
on Cobbs Lane.". Or with Coke, "Coca-cola is expense. Coke is also bad
for you". But it seems people don't like that usage in practice.
(FYI, I see some "Postgres" mentions have gotten in the 8.3 release
notes already from Tom. I will have to adjust those once we make a
final decision, but you can see how it looks now.)
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-10-25 21:37:57 | Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres" |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2007-10-25 21:24:38 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Release timeline for 8.3 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-10-25 21:37:57 | Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres" |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-10-25 20:57:55 | Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres" |