Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
Date
Msg-id 6023.1330444947@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Could we name this "postgresql_fdw" instead? �We already have several
>> ${productname}_fdw out there, and I don't want to get in the business of
>> having to guess variant spellings.

> If you don't like variant spellings, having anything to do with
> PostgreSQL, aka Postgres, and usually discussed on the pgsql-* mailing
> lists, is probably a bad idea.

[ snicker ]  But still, Peter has a point: pgsql is not a name for the
product, it's at best an abbreviation.  We aren't calling the other
thing orcl_fdw or ora_fdw.

I think either postgres_fdw or postgresql_fdw would be fine.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql_fdw, FDW for PostgreSQL server