Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

Magnus,

Notice that Josh owns postgresINC.com/net/org   I am still a +1
regardless of that.  While Josh could change his name, he would have to
balance the loss of the CommandPrompt collateral that he has already
garnered.  It is not as simple a change as PostgreSQl to Postgres.

Regardless, even if Josh changes the company name, I believe that the
benefits far outweigh that potential negative and we should move
forward.

Derek M. Rodner
Director, Product Strategy
EnterpriseDB Corporation
732.331.1333 office
484.252.1943 cell
www.enterprisedb.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus Hagander [mailto:magnus@hagander.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 2:47 PM
To: Joshua D. Drake
Cc: Derek Rodner; Robert Bernier; pgsql-advocacy@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] The naming question (Postgres vs
PostgreSQL)

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Before anyone goes down this path too far it is very important that I
> disclose (as I have on multiple occasions before) that Command Prompt
> owns the name Postgres, Inc (and domains postgresinc.com/net/org).
>
> Although we do not have intention to immediately change our name, I
will
> note that if the project changes its name, it increases the
possibility
> that we may do so.

First, thanks for letting us know this before people get too settled on
something :) At least those of us who missed it last time(s)...

Second, this makes my own vote much easier: a clear -1 on the change
(unless cmd would be donating that name+domains to the pg fund or
something, but given that you didn't suggest that I don't expect that to
happen)

//Magnus