Re: Using Postgres as an alias

2007-09-27_01:46:08-0400 Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>:

> We don't require 100% agreement on anything becuase it is hard to get
> anything done.

100% no. A clear consensus, yes. Or maybe we should just give anyone
with an opinion on the subject CVS commit privileges and hash it out
there? I don't see any evidence in this thread that a clear majority
would prefer the use of 'Postgres' over the official name 'PostgreSQL'
in official documentation. Is 'Postgres' acceptable shorthand (like
'Philly') - yes. Has the official name changed? No. If the official
name is PostgreSQL, it should continue to be used as such, rather than
subverted in a thinly disguised naming coup.

> We are looking for general agreement, and I think we are trying to get
> there.

In chess, when you make the same move repeatedly without making any
progress, it is called a draw. The game mercifully ends. I have not
seen one person say "Oh, I understand where you are coming from now,
I've changed my mind completely!". This conversation is going nowhere
right now. Please don't bring it up again in three weeks. Bring it up
in three years maybe.

--
Ron Peterson
https://www.yellowbank.com/