Hosting Provided By

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Dropping postgres as a whole.

From: Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt.com>
Date: Thu Sep 27 2007 - 14:07:48 EDT

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:

>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre junk and
>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.

>
> To you, it doesn't matter anyway. You're consistently saying you're
> fine with the, "also referred to as Postgres", just that you don't
> want to change it officially. Still, you're saying, "also referred to
> as PG" which means you still have no intent to officially do anything.
>
> Seems to me like you're trying to get everyone to forget the actual
> official name change topic and back onto the Postgres, PG, <insert
> your own favorite name here> discussion.

I am simply offering an alternative idea that may actually have some merit and has shown to have at least some by the posts of one core member and the leader of the PDXPUG.

I would also note that the "current" topic is not about changing official name. The current topic, is about if we should intersperse PostgreSQL and Postgres into the documentation.

>> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself included.

>
> So do I, but not in conversation; it just sounds lame. I can't think
> of one sentence that sounds good with PG in place of Postgres.

I don't know that I agree. I could see, "Yeah I use pgsql, as a little cumbersome, but Pg is short, simple and sweet".

> Frankly, I think PostgreSQL is better than "PG" in spoken
> conversation.

Of course it is. That is why the name should never officially change.

Do you need help?

>
> Examples (which sounds better from a marketing perspective? PG is a
> geek acronym that ain't gonna fly in helping Postgres advocacy):
>
> After seeing what PG is capable of, our company decided to adopt it.
> After seeing what Postgres is capable of, our company decided to adopt it.
> After seeing what PostgreSQL is capable of, our company decided to adopt it.

+1 on the third one.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
- The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ UNIQUE NOT NULL Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG+/F0ATb/zqfZUUQRAj5gAJ0U0HWVSUGgRtILPCud0bilRoJ18ACeJDdB DidV1/yrRgn+mdbYaEN2s3o=
=obhX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------

TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at

                
http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

Received on Thu Sep 27 14:08:48 2007

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Selena Deckelmann: "Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Dropping postgres as a whole."
Previous message: Joshua D. Drake: "Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Dropping postgres as a whole."
In reply to: Jonah H. Harris: "Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Dropping postgres as a whole."
Next in thread: Ron Mayer: "Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Dropping postgres as a whole."

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ] [ By messages with attachments ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Oct 07 2007 - 10:22:53 EDT

Do you need more help?