Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


Josh Berkus wrote:

> For example, think of the 40 million hardware devices with PostgreSQL on
> them.  The companies that make those devices will have to *automatically*
> handle a name change, on a large-scale, long-distance-deployed basis.
> If it's sufficiently painful, some of them will just switch databases ...
> most could be using SQLite or Derby anyway.

Switch databases because they have to rename something?! Even if they did
have to rename, which they don't at all, that's hardly going to cause them
to rewrite all their code to support a new database. Especially since
switching to Derby will cause them to have to change the name AND the code. :)


Gabriele Bartolini devilishly advocated:

> It goes without saying that all this stuff won't be usable anymore if we
> decide to change name in the short term.

I think we are getting a little silly here. If the preferred project name is
changed, nothing will _have_ to get thrown out, changed, etc. PostgreSQL can
remain an acceptable synonym from here until the end of time. There will
be little to no confusion - a simple FAQ item should cover it:

Q: Why do some places use "Postgres" and some use "PostgreSQL"?

A: In October 2007 the project changed its official name from PostgreSQL
to Postgres, in recognition of the fact that PostgreSQL was difficult to
pronounce and encouraged incorrect abbreviations such as "Postgre", and
in recognition of the fact that most people ended up saying "Postgres" anyway.
Much of the documentation still says PostgreSQL, which is a perfectly
acceptable way to refer to the project. While both "Postgres" and "PostgreSQL"
refer to the same project, "Postgres" is now the preferred form.


Andrew Sullivan asked:

> Otherwise, people who know nothing about us will be asking, for years,
> "Why did you fork from the PostgreSQL project?"

Simple enough to answer: "We didn't, we just changed the name". Could even
be a FAQ. I'd rather have that question, than these ones:

"How do you say that?"
"Why does it have such a stupid name?"
"Is it okay to just say 'Postgres'?"

> But the users that you're _not_ in regular contact with -- never mind the
> users you don't have yet -- may end up confused or needlessly anxious,
> because you have taken something familiar and changed it in a way that
> is very visible.

But it is already referred to in many places by both names, so I can't
really envision this confusion happening.

For the record, I see no reason to rename postgresql.conf or go crazy - we're
not trying to do a Soviet Russia/1984 rewrite of history and
documentation purge - we're just switching from saying that Postgres is
an accepted alternative name to saying that Postgres is the preferred name.

A few other notes:

1. We somehow survived with an executable named "postmaster" for many years,
so people use our product despite non-matching names.

2. I don't care if it is tied to a release or not. Let's just do it, keep
it low key (no contests, etc.), and move on.

3. I don't think polls are very accurate or useful, but I also don't really
know a way to measure "community opinion". Mailing lists tend to get people
on the ends of the bell curve. I will say that I've talked to people at both
PG conferences and at OSCON quite a bit, and never received any resistance to
the idea. As someone else said, it would be good to hear Core's opinion on
this matter (although we've heard from almost all of them individually at
this point). I recognize that Core tries to stay hands off, but this is
ultimately a decision they should make (or bless) (if not the rename, then
at least the timing).

4. The whole domain name thing with Command Prompt is silly. If they want
to name themselves Postgres, Inc, so be it. If people are uncomfortable with
that happening, it's very unlikely the change will happen anyway, as you
don't want to anger the community and ecosystem that you need to survive.
As long as the community controls postgres.org and postgresql.org, we're good.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200708301248
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFG1vfuvJuQZxSWSsgRA9b7AJ4jfWhOhhBbMNC0fkGzaYEtv3zcgACggXgc
RWwbFs/NUb7DEyqcoikeEvc=
=tD+F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----