From: Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>
Message-Id: <199908091445.KAA01007@candle.pha.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New man pages
In-Reply-To: <37AEE198.FB80A1B0@alumni.caltech.edu> from Thomas Lockhart at
	"Aug 9, 1999 02:11:36 pm"
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 1999 10:45:11 -0400 (EDT)
CC: "[Jos_] Soares" <jose@sferacarta.com>,
	Postgres Hackers List <hackers@postgreSQL.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> > There's only a little thing that I would like to recall your attention;
> > I see whenever the name Postgres instead of
> > PostgreSQL. Is there a reason to continue to call it Postgres in the
> > docs ?
> 
> I have chosen to use "Postgres" within the docs, as a shorter (and
> pronouncable ;) form of our product. "PostgreSQL" appears in all
> titles and introductory material. I have considered the "SQL" part of
> the "PostgreSQL" as sort of a version or branch, like "OpenIngres" or
> "Windows 2000", and a bit cumbersome in the body of the docs.
> 
> But that was a choice which can always be reconsidered, we're just a
> "sed" away from a different name...

I vote for PostgreSQL.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026