Re: Using Postgres as an alias

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:

>> What I missed was the idea that postgres was now the preferred name, and that
>> we should be promoting. AFAICT the only agreement was that the FAQ should
>> officialy designate that Postgres is an acceptable short form the name
>> PostgreSQL. All of todays changes seem to be an extension of that agreement
>> (apparently by fiat, from what I can tell)
>
> The goal was to promote "Postgres" as an alternate name. I thought I
> had general agreement from the group to do this in both FAQs. If not, I
> will revert it.

No. The goal was to "accept" Postgres as an alternate name. There is
very clearly a difference between "accepting" something and "promoting"
something.

Joshua D. Drake

>

- --

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG+9ZJATb/zqfZUUQRAnrvAKCA5QL2ez6KvKIcSiriK8URfPPtmACfSGRn
0HpHVqfN9gtawuVEM1yA89c=
=zPLA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----