Message-ID: <470685E1.6010501@commandprompt.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 11:43:45 -0700
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070924)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
CC: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL vs. Postgres labeling inconsistency
References: <200710051922.01797.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<20071005182650.GD6005@fetter.org>
In-Reply-To: <20071005182650.GD6005@fetter.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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

David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 07:22:01PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Some of you may have noticed that there was a move proposed to use
>> "Postgres" alongside "PostgreSQL" as a product name in the
>> documentation and other written resources.  A change along that line
>> has already been made in the FAQ.
>>

>> So I think what is being proposed is wrong and needs to be reverted.
> 
> That, or (my preference) make the change larger.  I think it's
> significant that the vast majority of compatible software has some
> variant of Postgres and *not* PostgreSQL in the name.

I have seen no evidence of this.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

> 
> Cheers,
> David.


- --

      === 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

iD8DBQFHBoXhATb/zqfZUUQRAn76AJwIUIuHizLFSpqLoJYQo0c7JF0CJwCdHu8E
5tnkPv4UwCXnubexTWwiRlI=
=2Ufl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----