Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

Jan Wieck wrote:
> We don't have the choice of doing nothing, because not changing back to
> Postgres means you have to accept Postgre. And that's not exactly
> "nothing" to me. It turns my guts upside down, but it is what seems
> logically our name, so it has every right to be officially accepted.

If we do nothing and "Postgre" continues to become a defacto standard
name, people could add a QL feature so "Postgre's QL" could justify
the current pronunciation and domain names. :-)