| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andy Astor <andy(dot)astor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Date: | 2007-09-02 20:21:06 |
| Message-ID: | 46DB1B32.9010806@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Andy Astor wrote:
>> Commercial Benefit
>> ------------------
>> EnterpriseDB will receive zero commercial benefit from the name change.
>
> All due respect Andy but that is simply not true. You have EnterpriseDB
> Postgres, there is name correlation. That is business value. You know
> better.
If that was the aim we would have branded it as "EnterpriseDB
PostgreSQL" from the outset. At the time that was decided this
reincarnation of the topic was far in the future so there was no reason
for us to suspect a possible name change.
/D
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-09-02 20:24:15 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Previous Message | Chris Mair | 2007-09-02 19:39:40 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |