| From: | Robert Bernier <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Decibel!" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Ron Peterson <ron(dot)peterson(at)yellowbank(dot)com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Date: | 2007-08-28 15:15:23 |
| Message-ID: | 200708281115.23261.robert.bernier5@sympatico.ca |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tuesday 28 August 2007 11:06, Dave Page wrote:
> Decibel! wrote:
> > I think we can just as easily make the change without any real fanfare
> > at all.
>
> I'm inclined to agree. For the most part we could all just slowly change
> things to 'Postgres'. I doubt anyone would really notice, except we'd
> get fewer people getting it wrong!
How about a vote?
How many people feel we should adopt 'postgres' for the '9.0' reference documentation (let's leave the issue of the tons of work involved out of the debate for the moment)?
Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-08-28 15:23:36 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2007-08-28 15:06:47 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |