Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly

From: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: I am being interviewed by OReilly
Date: 2002-07-05 07:47:16
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.44.0207051642060.478-100000@angelic.cynic.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> I'd not be in favor of picking something new out of the blue, but I'd
> pick 'Postgres' over 'PostgreSQL' if it were up to me.

As I recall the only real reason for the change was to emphasize that
the query language had changed to SQL. Back in my young and naive days
(probably early '95) I remember picking up Postgres, realizing it didn't
use SQL as the query language, thinking, "How terrible!" and immediately
dropping it for MySQL. (I'm older and wiser now, but it's too late--all
the systems that let you use something less crappy than SQL are now
gone. *Sigh*.) Anyway, I expect that others had the same experience, and
thus something like that was required to get people who had previously
dropped it to go back to it again.

Now that QUEL or PostQUEL or whatever it was is long gone and fogotten
(except maybe in certain CA-Unicenter shops), I see no reason we
couldn't go back to "Postgres" now.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message RFLM101 2002-07-05 08:58:39 Linux 7.1 dependency problems
Previous Message Curt Sampson 2002-07-05 07:34:01 Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-07-05 07:57:44 DROP COLUMN Progress
Previous Message Curt Sampson 2002-07-05 07:34:01 Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am