Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)
От | Federico |
---|---|
Тема | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a3e8e2210708300418o763e3b2y48f5b8d6a8b3d207@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) (Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On 8/30/07, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Bruce Momjian a écrit : > > Ron Mayer wrote: > >> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > >>> Steve Atkins wrote: > >>>> If the immediate response to someone who has problems with their > >>>> postgres system on IRC / email weren't "Yer sayin' it wrong, dummy!" > >>>> that'd be less of a problem. It's an ugly blemish on what are otherwise > >>>> very helpful peer support fora. > >>> this usually only happens when somebody uses "postgre" - never seen > >>> people complain about "postgres" ... > >>> > >> The reason people assume "Postgre" is the right short form is > >> because that's what the current capitalization "PostgreSQL" > >> implies. > >> > >> If the name is changed to "PostgreS" you may still > >> have the problem. With "Postgres" it won't be. > >> > >> If the name is changed to "PostgresQL" the "postgre" > >> problem would probably go away - but I think most would > >> agree that changing to "PostgresQL" is rather silly. > > > > Consider that with PostgresQL, URLs, email list names, postgresql.conf, > > searches don't have to change at all, and we have something that is more > > clearly pronounceable. > > > > So the product name will be Postgres, the binary is already postgres and > the configuration file will still have the name postgresql.conf. This > will be great to explain at training courses. This will cause confusion. > This will cause questions on mailing lists and booths. > > I'm still against the name change but I rather prefer a complete change > than a change on the more easy strings to "search and replace". > > Regards. > I agree with Guillaume and Gabriele. Probably everything seems fine in advocacy list but I don't think that enterprises and users will agree with a sudden change of name. A thing like this can be a boomerang making PostgreSQL nasty at people that now love it :( As suggested by Gabriele a soft change is more suitable. Kind regards Federico -- Federico Campoli is: @ PLUG -> Consigliere, http://www.prato.linux.it PostgreSQL Consulting -> PGHost http://www.pghost.eu
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: