Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Date: 2007-09-02 18:13:06
Message-ID: 46DAFD32.6070506@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-de-allgemein

Jan Wieck wrote:
> We don't have the choice of doing nothing, because not changing back to
> Postgres means you have to accept Postgre. And that's not exactly
> "nothing" to me. It turns my guts upside down, but it is what seems
> logically our name, so it has every right to be officially accepted.

If we do nothing and "Postgre" continues to become a defacto standard
name, people could add a QL feature so "Postgre's QL" could justify
the current pronunciation and domain names. :-)

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Mair 2007-09-02 19:39:40 Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Previous Message Ron Mayer 2007-09-02 17:59:53 Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

Browse pgsql-de-allgemein by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2007-09-02 20:24:15 Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Previous Message Ron Mayer 2007-09-02 17:59:53 Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)