Re: [HACKERS] Small changes for the "no excuses" release

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Postgres Documentation List <docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Small changes for the "no excuses" release
Date: 1998-03-16 06:04:11
Message-ID: 350CC0DB.3EFE0DC3@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > PostgreSQL seem to have a lot of names;
> > Postgres 95, Postgres, Pg, Pgsql ... All these names are used in
> > FAQ, filenames, docs, installation info, messages etc.
> >
> > Examples:
> > The backend executable is 'postgres', why not 'postgresql'?
> > INSTALL: "User postgres is the Postgres superuser"?
> >
> > I think it would be a good idea to use only "PostgreSQL" in all
> > docs, file names and so on, and "pgsql" as the official abbrev.
> >
> > This is one of the things new users notice and find strange.
> > I know, because I did, and people I know did it too.
>
> Added to TODO list.

Frankly, the voluminous docs, many adapted from the originals, seem to
read better using "Postgres" rather than "PostgreSQL" or "Postgres95". I
changed 'em all after defining what each is in the introduction. Would
be a good bit of work to change them back, particularly since folks
aren't volunteering in droves for work on documentation...

- Tom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message t-ishii 1998-03-16 06:20:36 Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Previous Message Thomas G. Lockhart 1998-03-16 05:59:53 Re: [HACKERS] datetime default 'now' broken?