Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

From: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andy Astor <andy(dot)astor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Date: 2007-09-02 01:26:34
Message-ID: 46DA114A.70607@Yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On 9/1/2007 7:02 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> PostgreSQL is the *formal name*, while Postgres is the *trade name* ... call it
> whichever you want, people will know what you are talking about ... get over it.

I could get over it, if this topic as well as the ugly Postgre sh*t it
causes as a side effect would ever stop popping up. But it seems to me
however often we "get over it", the problem only submerges to pop up
again for the next release. Could it be that "getting over it" is kinda
like playing ostrich - AGAIN, and that the numerous times we "got over
it" only made the situation worse by reinforcing a mistake made long ago?

I suggest we someday stop "getting over it" and instead "get done with
it". Because rest assured, otherwise it'll be back again ... and again.

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jonah H. Harris 2007-09-02 03:28:05 Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Previous Message Jonah H. Harris 2007-09-02 00:57:16 Re: Information Week article on PostgreSQL benchmark