Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

+1 for renaming to Postgres ASAP, and if we can employ a little self-deprecating humor, all the better.

On 8/28/2007 1:29 PM Derek Rodner wrote:
> I actually think a nice tongue and cheek campaign could work nicely
> here. Not a massive corporate-like PR push... but a humorous (we don't
> take ourselves too seriously) letter or blog post, etc.
>
> Derek M. Rodner
> Director, Product Strategy
> EnterpriseDB Corporation
> 732.331.1333 office
> 484.252.1943 cell
> www.enterprisedb.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-advocacy-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-advocacy-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Robert Bernier
> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:23 PM
> To: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] The naming question (Postgres vs
> PostgreSQL)
>
>>> How about a vote?
>>>
>>> How many people feel we should adopt 'postgres' for the '9.0'
>>> reference documentation (let's leave the issue of the tons of work
>>> involved out of the debate for the moment)?
>
> +1
>
>> I agree with doing it without any fanfare.
>
>
> I wonder.
>
> Wouldn't it be a good marketing move to put a "vote for a name change"
> on the website's front page? The idea would be to make announcements all
> over the place like slashdot, digg etc. and asking the average joe for
> his input. You know the saying, "there's no such thing as bad press".
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Robert
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
>