-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> Hello Bruce
>>
>> I really unlike this game about change the name. If you get 100%
>> support then situation is simple, but you hasn't it. I use PostgreSQL,
>> Postgres and I doesn't any strong benefit with change of name.
>> Devrim's argument about renaming all packages is really strong for me.
>>
>> I agree so official documentation have to use only name PostgreSQL. Is
>> technical documentation not articles. And again I don't see any
>> benefit. Currently Postgres is well know synonym for PostgreSQL and
>> there isn't necessary push it into documentation. Please stop it.
>
> We don't require 100% agreement on anything becuase it is hard to get
> anything done. We are looking for general agreement, and I think we are
> trying to get there.
>
We had general agreement. We modified the FAQ.
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
iD8DBQFG+9XwATb/zqfZUUQRAsHaAKCCEcEl77tZ9jWLJzkdEi7A4mgQTgCbB0Eb
2TWkq3PgiMg35PkzeI4dV2A=
=wLII
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
