> Command Prompt doesn't doesn't have any staff contributing to the public
> project. Do we tell them they can't use the name "PostgreSQL"? That is
> just an example. There are tons of PostgreSQL usages out there that
> have no payback to the community. ConnX and dbexperts are good
> examples.
If their next release should have several security issues pass through
bugtrack, it would be easy to confuse the two products and think that
PostgreSQL proper has the problems.
So yes, I would argue that Command Prompt should not be distributing a
modified PostgreSQL under the PostgreSQL brand name. Calling it Mammoth
Database and mentioning that it is based, in part, on PostgreSQL would
be more appropriate.