-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> We will also spend many hours declaring to people:
>>
>> 1. Why we changed
>> 2. Did we think it was a good change
>> 3. Re-educating press
>> 4. Constantly fixing our own mistakes for the people that have been
>> doing this for a decade.
>
> Again, long term vs. short term. If we don't change it we will be having
> awkward pronunciations forever, and taking the marketing hit for that
> forever. There is going to be short term pain, but long term gain.
This seems backward to me. Long term thinking usually involves more
problems than a singular issue.
The *only* issue of validity that I have seen in regards to the name
change is the fact that it is hard to pronounce.
However, the weight, and size of the issues brought up over what happens
"if" we change, are significant.
What I see happening is a decision trying to be made on the basis that
people want to stop having this argument.
I have an idea. Let's just say, the name is PostgreSQL, which it already
is and has been for 11 years and isn't going to change. Put that in the
FAQ and when people ask, you point there :)
That way we can all focus on actually doing something productive versus
arguing in this thread yet again about which editor is better, vi or
emacs. Oh and just to be clear, the answer is joe.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
- --
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG1wBUATb/zqfZUUQRAhIVAKCuQ/fyO6t1+Y9N5VmFPqCJwUhT6wCgpr+P
f3zwhn+ypDMdceq8k9pnOpY=
=sOFk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
