-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 07:22:01PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> Some of you may have noticed that there was a move proposed to use
>> "Postgres" alongside "PostgreSQL" as a product name in the
>> documentation and other written resources. A change along that line
>> has already been made in the FAQ.
>>
>> So I think what is being proposed is wrong and needs to be reverted.
>
> That, or (my preference) make the change larger. I think it's
> significant that the vast majority of compatible software has some
> variant of Postgres and *not* PostgreSQL in the name.
I have seen no evidence of this.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> Cheers,
> David.
- --
=== 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
iD8DBQFHBoXhATb/zqfZUUQRAn76AJwIUIuHizLFSpqLoJYQo0c7JF0CJwCdHu8E
5tnkPv4UwCXnubexTWwiRlI=
=2Ufl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
