Re: Change the name (was: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL))

This isn't an EDB push, even tough several EDB people have advocated
the change. Bringing the project up to the times, technology wise
wouldn't be a bad idea, imho. Command Prompt already maintains the
technical end of what you're proposing, though not in the interest of
carrying a parallel community, afaik.

I haven't heard anyone interested in GPL'ing the code, and EDB would
have the least to gain from a GPL fork. Your comments seem to be more
flame bait than anything else, along with the argument that FreeBSD
breaks the username standard so we shouldn't change the project name.

Gavin

On 9/3/07, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> - --On Monday, September 03, 2007 13:20:39 -0500 Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
> wrote:
>
> > Ok, well, at the least then we really need to focus discussion on
> > "Should we change the name" and quit worrying about how we'll actually
> > do it.
>
> The other option is that EDB creates a Postgres community, GPLs the code and
> puts it all into Subversion, and run it in parallel to the PostgreSQL community
> ... then everyone that wants to keep the status quo can stick around and
> continue marketing and pushing PostgreSQL, and those that "want change" can
> just move over to that new project ...
>
> Now, *that* would be an interesting experiment ...
>
>
> - ----
> Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
> Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
> Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
>
> iD8DBQFG3FJL4QvfyHIvDvMRAh0AAKCiy/aKN/RtpiLJjb4l0bCtxyU4cgCght0h
> 8/T2YI+Gr9ad2F+iHl1DrqQ=
> =KfKA
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>