Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:54:43 -0400
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>
To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
Message-ID: <20071026175443.GY4717@crankycanuck.ca>
References: <1193341715.22012.84.camel@laptop.gunduz.org>
	<200710252010.l9PKAVn20205@momjian.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200710252010.l9PKAVn20205@momjian.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 04:10:31PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Let's not get sidetracked here.  There was already agreement in advocacy
> to promote the use of the alias, and this thread is to discuss that, not

I object to this declaration of consensus.  I think there was an
agreement that the FAQ entry we had, or perhaps something slightly
stronger, was ok.  "Promotion" is quite another matter, and I don't
believe there was any such agreement.  I recall arguing rather
strongly that such an undertaking needs a _clear plan_ and that it
should not be in any case undertaken for 8.3, because the suggestion
came too late in the release cycle to put the necessary planning into
the matter.

What is the giant panic on this matter, anyway?

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
However important originality may be in some fields, restraint and 
adherence to procedure emerge as the more significant virtues in a 
great many others.   --Alain de Botton