-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
>> Here's an idea: if I go a month without seeing "Postgre" or "PostgresSQL",
>> or having someone ask me how to pronounce it, I'll stop asking people
>> to make the change. :)
> Or, you could accept it isn't going to happen. Core has already made the
> announcement that it isn't going to happen. The reality is there is a
> huge community that is perfectly happy with our geeky name. There is
> nothing stopping you or anyone else from using the term Postgres.
Well, I don't happen to agree. First, Core is heavily divided on the
issue, just like the community is. Frankly, based on previous threads
and talking with people at conferences, I'd say the majority realize
its a bad name and would support the change (as long as it was done
in a careful and measured way) (P.S. what's with all the "changing the
name will destroy companies and organizations" FUD?)
> EDB has already rebranded all their products to use it and it has
> affected our ability to continue as a thriving project.
It has? News to me.
> If you want to use the term postgres, do so. I use them interchangeably.
As do I. But that's not the issue.
> And to be frank... PostgreSQL is a killer name. Why? Because it is an
> instant conversation starter... I can't count how many times I have had
> a conversation with someone, told them what I do and then have to
> explain what it is just because the name is difficult to pronounce.
Are you kidding me? You're trying to say our unpronounceability is a
*good* thing? That's funny. I have no problem starting a conversation
using "Postgres" alone - it's not a common English word.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201001261509
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iEYEAREDAAYFAktfTDEACgkQvJuQZxSWSsgzugCgqOY/XWxKNuGhzzvT6qjEDPwX
DfgAoPaFZAXon/cvS0KMt81x3f7YCOmS
=2Q8e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----