Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs.

On Fri, 2004-03-12 at 10:37, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jeroen T. Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 02:42:47PM -0000, Dave Page wrote:
> >> We need some distinction between the core project sites and other
> >> project sites - istm that a different domain is the only way to do that.
>
> > Okay, then how about postgres-extra.net, or forpostgres.net?
>
> > Saying Postgres instead of PostgreSQL takes out a bit of that extra length
> > and it's lots easier to pronounce. We've been through this whole what-
> > shall-we-call-it thing months ago and IIRC the upshot was that the short
> > version of the name is perfectly acceptable and much catchier. Here's a
> > chance to use it!
>
> Well, if you want to think along those lines, I believe that we (PGDG)
> currently hold these domain names:
> postgresql.org
> postgresql.com
> postgresql.net
> postgres.org
> postgres.com
> It looks like some domain squatter has his tentacles on postgres.net
> :-(. We are not doing much with any of these except redirecting to
> postgresql.org.
>
> You could make a case that postgres.org for the projects would be the
> perfect complement to postgresql.org for the core.
>
> After looking at this list I'm sort of inclined to the idea that we
> should *not* use postgresql.net for much of anything ... that will just
> help drive traffic to that squatter at postgres.net.
>
> This also brings up the thought that if we do want to use pgfoundry.org,
> we'd better register pgfoundry.net and pgfoundry.com before someone
> else does.
>

yug... if we go with postgres.org|net|com we are just asking for the
press to keep referring to the product as postgres instead of
postgresql, so i'd strongly be against that idea.

Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL