From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Message-Id: <200710261911.l9QJBuL07087@momjian.us>
Subject: Re: Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres"
In-Reply-To: 
To: PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:11:56 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

[ BCC to docs.]

FYI, since no one liked my second-in-paragraph usage of "Postgres" in
the FAQ and developer's FAQ, I have removed it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

bruce wrote:
> [ BCC to docs because this might affect documentation too.]
> 
> You probably remember the discussion about promoting the use of the
> alias "Postgres" in addition to the official name "PostgreSQL".  I have
> changed the FAQ so that in paragraphs with multiple references to
> "PostgreSQL" we also use the alias "Postgres".
> 
> I have talked about a similar change to our documentation and perhaps
> the web site, but I am _not_ ready to discuss those.
> 
> What I want to ask about is an idea a few people have mentioned.  They
> don't like that we change usage in the same paragraph.  The suggestion
> is to mention that "Postgres" is an alias to "PostgreSQL" at the top of
> the document and just use "Postgres" in the remainder of the document.
> 
> This seems like a lot more use of the alias than I though we wanted as a
> group, but because several of the people suggesting this also didn't
> want the alias at all, I figure I should ask and we can discuss it.
> 
> So, for the FAQ, which currently uses the second-entry-per-paragraph
> logic, should it be changed to the logic suggested above where every
> mention but the first is "Postgres"?  (This will of course affect the
> documentation changes when we are ready to discuss those.)

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +