Re: PostgreSQL vs. Postgres labeling inconsistency

Hi,

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I believe both the FAQ and the documentation do explain the naming issue near
> the beginning.  But the rest of the document should use one name
> consistently, or it will just look silly and confusing.  Also consider that
> many of our written resources are not read linearly, so it becomes even more
> important to use consistent terminology that does not require much context to
> understand.
>
> So I think what is being proposed is wrong and needs to be reverted.

-1

It's a compromise, a single step of a slow migration (which I still see
as the only reasonable option).

While I certainly agree that such documents should strive for consistent
naming in general, I think it's absolutely acceptable for an open source
project to break with that rule during such a migration. As pointed out
i.e. by Bruce, confusion between the two names isn't that big.

Regards

Markus