| From: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Bernier <robert(dot)bernier5(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(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 15:24:45 |
| Message-ID: | BB9631F3-1411-4535-BE71-B3FDDBDFF949@decibel.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Aug 28, 2007, at 10:15 AM, Robert Bernier wrote:
> 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)?
I vote we just make the change without any fuss, ASAP. But I'll take
any kind of change over sticking with PostgreSQL.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim Nasby decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Guillaume Lelarge | 2007-08-28 15:30:51 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2007-08-28 15:23:36 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |