| From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Using Postgres as an alias |
| Date: | 2007-09-26 22:20:00 |
| Message-ID: | 46FADB10.3050308@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> If we agree we should mention our alias "Postgres" more, where do you
>> propose we do that? I suggested the documentation and FAQ. Do you
>> have a better idea?
>
> The fact that there is a disagreement about the name doesn't give us a
> mandate to use both alternatives. As long as the official project and
> product name is PostgreSQL, the material produced by the project should
> use that name.
>
It seems many organizations and products that have a long and cumbersome
name use a short-form in their documentation more often than not. Think
"J2EE" vs "Java 2 Platform, Enterprise Edition" or "SAP xRPM" who's
official name is "SAP® xApp™ Resource and Portfolio Management"
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2007-09-26 22:29:00 | Re: Using Postgres as an alias |
| Previous Message | Lukas Kahwe Smith | 2007-09-26 22:10:04 | Re: Using Postgres as an alias |