On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:07:26PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 04:56:05PM +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> >> --- a/COPYRIGHT
> >> +++ b/COPYRIGHT
> >> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> >> PostgreSQL Database Management System
> >> -(formerly known as Postgres, then as Postgres95)
> >> +(also known as Postgres, formerly as Postgres95)
> >>
> >> Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2025, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
>
> > I'm not seeing this change as aligned with
> > https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/project-name/, which says Postgres
> > "is an alias or nickname and is not the official name of the project." The
> > official product name did change Postgres -> Postgres95 -> PostgreSQL, with
> > "Postgres" holding the status of a nickname since Postgres95 became the
> > official name. Today's text matches that history, and the proposed text
> > doesn't. Can you share more from the brief discussion? Changing a license
> > file is an eyebrow-raising event, so we should do it only if the win is clear.
> > There may be an argument for making this change, but I'm missing it currently.
>
> PGCAC holds trademarks on both "PostgreSQL" and "Postgres". We've
> been given legal advice that both terms need to be in current use
> to preserve the trademarks. Which they are and have been, but the
> present wording in COPYRIGHT doesn't align with that. The website
> phrasing will be adjusted as well.
I'm good with the change, then.
