X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FC7BD1B4D7 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:17:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 63088-02 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:17:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from tht.net (vista.tht.net [216.126.88.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03DCD1E9A4 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 17:17:13 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [134.22.68.249] (dyn-68-249.tor.dsl.tht.net [134.22.68.249]) by tht.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4A8D76B08; Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:17:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: Promoting PostgreSQL to the world. From: Rod Taylor To: Josh Berkus Cc: Bruce Momjian , "pgsql-www@postgresql.org" In-Reply-To: <200404291251.15453.josh@agliodbs.com> References: <200404291929.i3TJTl201079@candle.pha.pa.us> <1083267853.30065.371.camel@jester> <200404291251.15453.josh@agliodbs.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1083269796.30065.401.camel@jester> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 16:16:36 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200404/261 X-Sequence-Number: 4365 On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 15:51, Josh Berkus wrote: > Rod, > > > So yes, I would argue that Command Prompt should not be distributing a > > modified PostgreSQL under the PostgreSQL brand name. Calling it Mammoth > > Database and mentioning that it is based, in part, on PostgreSQL would > > be more appropriate. > > What if, on the other hand, they invite us to inspect it? > > And it's not like CMD is a total non-contributor in the way dbExperts is. > While they're not patching modules to the main source, they've released > several add-ons as OSS. If I was going to yank the trademark chain on > anyone, it would be dbexperts. Yes, your right. CMD has been good for the main group. I simply want to ensure that there is enough differentiation in naming convention that the unwashed masses will not confuse the 2. The FreeBSD group decided long ago that in order for it to hold the FreeBSD name, it must go through the FreeBSD processes as a part of the group. In this case, the FreeBSD name demonstrated quality that you could trust was tested, open, etc. This is why there is TrustedBSD (prior to re-integration with the FreeBSD project) and DragonFlyBSD rather than Trusted FreeBSD and FreeBSD Experimental. I think that was a wise decision as there is very little confusion as to what the FreeBSD group has been responsible for or supports. What does the name "PostgreSQL Replicator" tell someone who finds it in Googles results? I'm guilty of doing the same thing with PostgreSQL Autodoc.