Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> This shows 70% in favor of a change to "Postgres", so far.
>
> Of course, that's 70% of -advocacy, which by nature is going to be the
> subset of the community most interested in this change and least
> interested in the ensuing costs.
I think the community that most needs to be polled are
actually external to the community. IMHO The people
most harmed by the non-intuitive name today are:
* IT Customers who have a problem with the Postgre they got
bundled with some CRM software they bought and need to
ask for help.
* Execs and sales people telling their customers that they're
selling products based on Postgre's QL.
* VC's wasting their time discussing pronunciation trivia
with startups looking for funding instead of discussing
the products and businesses of the startup.
I think -advocacy is indeed a better place than -hackers
to discuss it too. As far as I can tell, no changes
discussed would touch the actual code.
No processes renamed.
No paths renamed.
No libraries renamed.
No variables renamed.
Note also, most proposals I've seen in the discussion
include both Postgres and PostgreSQL as acceptable terms
so the only place that really really needs to change
is the FAQ, and *gradually* the web site and docs.
