| From: | "Dawid Kuroczko" <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Robert Bernier" <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Date: | 2007-08-28 18:51:33 |
| Message-ID: | 758d5e7f0708281151l586e8cb5va1524d059c11ad90@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 8/28/07, Robert Bernier <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca> wrote:
> 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)?
0 (abstain)
While I do think that 'Postgres' has advantages over 'PostgreSQL',
I don't think we should drop PostgreSQL. Something which is
defacto already happening, as usually the default database is
'postgres', user is 'postgres' and so on. At the same time I wouldn't
want package maintainers to change package name from 'postgresql'
to 'postgres' [again]. I wouldn't want Sun to need to update brochures
that they support Postgres (formerly known as PostgreSQL).
Personally I would like to use names 'PostgreSQL Relational Database
Managament System', short form: Postgres with PostgreSQL as an
acceptable, though deprecated, alternative.
Regards,
Dawid
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-08-28 18:51:43 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-08-28 18:46:36 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |