Re: pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres"

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres"
Date: 2008-04-09 00:53:01
Message-ID: 10742.1207702381@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

momjian(at)postgresql(dot)org (Bruce Momjian) writes:
> Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres" ---
> seems unnecessary to mention in the FAQ, per discussion on IRC.

This doesn't seem like an improvement in the least. It makes it
appear that Postgres is just a randomly chosen abbreviation that
has no particular historical standing compared to, say, Postgre.
The previous text made it perfectly clear *why* that shortening
is preferred over others.

Why are such politically touchy decisions being taken in an anonymous,
unarchived forum like IRC, anyway? Especially when what *was*
being publicly discussed was an entirely different change?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-docs/2008-04/msg00001.php

(Not that I like JD's proposed change better, but at least he
made it in a reasonably well-read forum.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-04-09 00:55:30 pgsql: Revert sentence removal from nickname in FAQ.
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2008-04-09 00:44:07 pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres"

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-04-09 00:56:18 Re: [HACKERS] pgsql: Remove mention of the Berkeley origins of the alias "Postgres"
Previous Message Andrew Chernow 2008-04-09 00:47:38 Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a