From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
Date: | 2002-07-05 03:59:23 |
Message-ID: | 8102.1025841563@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
>> At some point, we may have to modify our name and start at 1.0 again.
> Ya, that's it ... we've only spent, what, 8 years now making 'PostgreSQL'
> known, so let's change the name *just* so that we can start at 1.0 and
> face a new challenge of getting ppl to recognize the name?
I've heard a number of people opine that we should go back to just plain
'Postgres', which is pronounceable by the uninitiate, and besides which
that's what we use informally most of the time. 'PostgreSQL' is about
as marketing-unfriendly a name as you could easily find...
I'd not be in favor of picking something new out of the blue, but I'd
pick 'Postgres' over 'PostgreSQL' if it were up to me.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-05 04:01:32 | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-07-05 03:54:39 | Re: Should next release by 8.0 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-05 04:01:32 | Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-07-05 03:54:39 | Re: Should next release by 8.0 |