From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Informal pronunciation poll |
Date: | 2007-08-30 19:21:13 |
Message-ID: | fb75bf$1v80$1@news.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
I just asked a few people unfamiliar with the project
how they'd expect "PostgreSQL" would be pronounced,
and all agreed that they'd expect "Postgre Sickle".
I'd be interested to see others perform such a poll
with people in their workplaces/homes/wherever and
see what results they get.
I think the very worst part about the current situation
is that there's a community of pronunciation/spelling-police
who feel a need to "correct" anyone who says or spells
the obvious implied short form of "postgre". Regardless
of whether the Postgres or PostgreSQL wins the debate, I
suspect that as long as PostgreSQL's are around Postgre
will be around as well.
To avoid having having most new user's introduction's
to the project (including CEOs, etc) being the "you're
pronouncing it wrong" rant, would it make sense to
formally announce that "postgre" is officially
acceptable even though no one likes how it sounds?
(It's not like anyone likes how "QL" sounds either.)
This requires zero changes in our usage/logos/etc
and has no work besides one sentence in the FAQ - but
will probably cut down on the bad-first-impressions
that the pronunciation-police inflict on new users.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2007-08-30 19:21:33 | Re: PostgreSQL.Org |
Previous Message | Gavin M. Roy | 2007-08-30 19:19:04 | Re: PostgreSQL.Org (was: PostgreSQL Conference Fal l 2007) |