Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>
>>The idea of calling it "Postgres SQL Server" has merit because it is so
>>close to what we already have, just an added 's' and a space.
>
>
> ... and a M$ trademark violation suit, just waiting to happen whenever
> M$ decides we are big enough to be a threat.
>
> Stay far far away from any name including "SQL Server".
IIRC SQL Server (or "SQL-server" to be exact) is just a definition from
the SQL standard. I doubt whether Microsoft can monopolize something
like that (the SQL standard was there first right?). Of course I am
making a pretty big assumption about the sanity of the actual law :)
Whether it is really worthwhile to invest resources into that is an
entirely different matter. Personally, I am happy with PostgreSQL.
Jochem
