Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D4349FCD0D for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:37:28 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25509-07 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:37:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [200.46.204.72]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D0F39FCD0A for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:37:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [200.46.204.72]) by news.hub.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l9QKbNqp021349 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:37:23 -0300 (ADT) (envelope-from news@news.hub.org) Received: (from news@localhost) by news.hub.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id l9QKU4RB012076 for pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 17:30:04 -0300 (ADT) (envelope-from news) From: "Marc G. Fournier From": X-Newsgroups: pgsql.advocacy Subject: Re: [DOCS] Pattern for use of the alias "Postgres" Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:30:03 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: <20071026175443.GY4717@crankycanuck.ca> <200710261835.l9QIZhq18498@momjian.us> X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.hub.org User-Agent: nn/6.7.3 To: pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200710/123 X-Sequence-Number: 12787 bruce@momjian.us (Bruce Momjian) writes: >Andrew Sullivan wrote: >> 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? >There is no panic. In fact whatever change to documentation we do will >not be seen until 8.3 final. >In 1-2 days there will be a request on advocacy for promotion in both >the FAQ and documentation and we can see if we can get consensus then. >Frankly, what I am seeing is that the minority who don't like the alias >are "trolling" or making procedural objections in an attempt to prevent >alias adoption. Or perhaps my perception is incorrect. Funny ... what I'm seeing is you trying to ram this through any which way you can ... -- ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664