Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> >> At some point, we may have to modify our name and start at 1.0 again.
>
> > Ya, that's it ... we've only spent, what, 8 years now making 'PostgreSQL'
> > known, so let's change the name *just* so that we can start at 1.0 and
> > face a new challenge of getting ppl to recognize the name?
>
> I've heard a number of people opine that we should go back to just plain
> 'Postgres', which is pronounceable by the uninitiate, and besides which
> that's what we use informally most of the time. 'PostgreSQL' is about
> as marketing-unfriendly a name as you could easily find...
I personally agree.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
