Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

From: Federico <rotellaro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Guillaume Lelarge" <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Ron Mayer" <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, "Stefan Kaltenbrunner" <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
Date: 2007-08-30 11:18:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On 8/30/07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian a écrit :
> > Ron Mayer wrote:
> >> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> >>> Steve Atkins wrote:
> >>>> If the immediate response to someone who has problems with their
> >>>> postgres system on IRC / email weren't "Yer sayin' it wrong, dummy!"
> >>>> that'd be less of a problem. It's an ugly blemish on what are otherwise
> >>>> very helpful peer support fora.
> >>> this usually only happens when somebody uses "postgre" - never seen
> >>> people complain about "postgres" ...
> >>>
> >> The reason people assume "Postgre" is the right short form is
> >> because that's what the current capitalization "PostgreSQL"
> >> implies.
> >>
> >> If the name is changed to "PostgreS" you may still
> >> have the problem.   With "Postgres" it won't be.
> >>
> >> If the name is changed to "PostgresQL" the "postgre"
> >> problem would probably go away - but I think most would
> >> agree that changing to "PostgresQL" is rather silly.
> >
> > Consider that with PostgresQL, URLs, email list names, postgresql.conf,
> > searches don't have to change at all, and we have something that is more
> > clearly pronounceable.
> >
> So the product name will be Postgres, the binary is already postgres and
> the configuration file will still have the name postgresql.conf. This
> will be great to explain at training courses. This will cause confusion.
> This will cause questions on mailing lists and booths.
> I'm still against the name change but I rather prefer a complete change
> than a change on the more easy strings to "search and replace".
> Regards.

I agree with Guillaume and Gabriele.
Probably everything seems fine in advocacy list but I don't think that
enterprises and users will agree with a sudden change of name.
A thing like this can be a boomerang making PostgreSQL nasty at people
that now love it :(

As suggested by Gabriele a soft change is more suitable.

Kind regards
Federico Campoli is:
@ PLUG -> Consigliere,
PostgreSQL Consulting  -> PGHost

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2007-08-30 11:39:00
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL.Org (was: PostgreSQL Conference Fal l 2007)
Previous:From: Luke LonerganDate: 2007-08-30 09:50:39
Subject: Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group