-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- --On Saturday, September 29, 2007 17:47:21 -0400 Jan Wieck
<JanWieck@Yahoo.com>
wrote:
> I just want to know where the majority stands on Postgre. Because if the
> majority says we should not accept it, then I can add some code to the IRC
> bot to jump down the throat of ... er ... let me rephrase that ... politely
> point out that Postgre is NOT an accepted name of the project, whenever
> someone new to the channel is asking a Postgre related question. And it would
> also ask for everyone to correct it wherever there is a chance (I do admit
> that during the first meeting with a new customer isn't really a good chance).
>
> But if instead, the majority thinks we should gallantly overlook the use of
> Postgre and act as if the person had accidentally made a typing error meaning
> Postgres indeed, we defacto do accept Postgre and should document it that way.
>
> Can't have it both ways.
If we want 'rude and ignorant that might push ppl away', go with the former ...
myself, I'm in the latter group ...
- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFG/t5D4QvfyHIvDvMRAtn6AKC8Y9K8D960aYp8iVnb00na+BF7SQCg02MZ
8kxAoiK4667h6VLCYPpFgqQ=
=Luhk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
