| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, derek(dot)rodner(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Using Postgres as an alias |
| Date: | 2007-09-27 08:01:28 |
| Message-ID: | 46FB6358.4040303@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> FAQ isn't strict technical documentation, and there aliases arn't too
> bad. Why do you thing so word Postgres needs any promoting?
Isn't it obvious from the number of people calling it Postgre that an
acceptable short form should be promoted?
Earlier in this round of discussion it seemed that most people didn't
like seeing postgre, but we were split on an official name change to
Postgres. Doesn't it therefore make sense to leave the official name,
and just promote the acceptable short name?
/D
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2007-09-27 08:10:07 | Re: Using Postgres as an alias |
| Previous Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2007-09-27 07:47:43 | Re: Using Postgres as an alias |