public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Robert Treat <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 10:14:25 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

[ I'm pushing Robert's comment over into the pghackers thread... ]

Robert Treat <[email protected]> writes:
> I wasn't going to force the issue just for my own sake... but ISTM Tom, Peter, 
> myself and possibly others were all confused somewhat by the switch.  
> Anyway... the only real point that I have about the whole thing is that 
> people used to complain that gborg was too nebulous a name (ie. whats a 
> gborg?) and people didnt know to look at it, or were confused as to what its 
> purpose was.  the idea of projects.postgresql.(org|net) seem like a real easy 
> way to make it crystal clear as to what exactly was going on at that site.  
> By making it pgfoundry.org, i guess it is clear as to its purpose as far as 
> project hosting, but it loses some of its ties to postgresql, to the point 
> where I think folks will wonder if this is an independent site or if it has 
> the backing of the greater postgresql community.  I tend to think that would 
> be a step back... 

I think that last is really the crux of the issue.  Josh observed that
whatever the site name is, it will be the task of the advocacy group to
"market" it with the correct public perception.  But choosing the right
name will surely make it easier to control the perception.  What we're
really arguing about here, IMHO, is the perceived "distance" between the
domain names for the core project and the other projects.  If they're
too different then it will be very hard to get people to see the
projects as related to PostgreSQL, no matter what marketing efforts we
try.  OTOH if they're too similar that may confuse things in other ways.

My feeling is that we want people to consider these projects as closely
tied to the Postgres community and so postgresql.something is just right.
I can see there are different opinions out there though...

			regards, tom lane

view thread (38+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: [HACKERS] The Name Game: postgresql.net vs. pgfoundry.org
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox