Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: vs.

From: David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: vs.
Date: 2004-03-12 10:03:55
Message-ID: (view raw or whole thread)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-www
Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> Just to speak up (as an avid lurker), I agree with Jeroen that this 
> distinction is quite subtle and may cause confusion. Some may even 
> expect the two to resolve to the same site, as a lot of popular sites 
> own .com/.net/.org, all resolving to the same site.

Speaking of .com vs .net vs .org, anyone remember the vs fiasco?

Anyway, if I can vote, I'll vote for (for the lack of 
better choices). I agree with Tom that "pgfoundry" is kind of random. 
It's not apparent at all that it's a PostgreSQL entity. Besides, Tom & 
Marc is already listed as the registrant of several domains including Why not use them?

Also, we're targetting the developers right? Please do not consider 
ourselves as being too stupid to differentiate between 
and If people don't like to type long names, we can 
always do automatic redirection between <projname>,<projname>, <projname>, 
etc. Or even perhaps use tinyurl :-)


In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-03-12 11:39:03
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: vs.
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2004-03-12 08:11:24
Subject: Re: The Name Game: vs.

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2004-03-12 10:46:26
Subject: Re: Default Stats Revisited
Previous:From: Fabien COELHODate: 2004-03-12 08:28:32
Subject: Re: client side syntax error localisation for psql (v1)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2015 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group