Re: the PostgreSQL Elephant
От | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: the PostgreSQL Elephant |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1089664150.15551.92.camel@camel обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: the PostgreSQL Elephant (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: the PostgreSQL Elephant
Re: the PostgreSQL Elephant |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 15:44, Josh Berkus wrote: > Peter, > > > There is no conflict. If a company calls itself PostgreSQL, Inc., then > > it will logically use the PostgreSQL elephant as its logo. If you feel > > there is a conflict then the conflict is really a company calling > > itself PostgreSQL, Inc. That was not particularly wise, but I don't > > really consider it a problem. But the logo is really a much smaller > > subset problem. > > You missed part of Lamar's commentary: apparently the BEH logo belonged to > PostgreSQL Inc. and we started using it, not the other way around. So the > logo is theirs and we copied it. > > Which *definitely* wasn't smart. > Maybe I missed this part, but what is the origin of the logo we currently use? Ie. who wrote/drew it? where did they first submit it and for what purpose? Lamar stated pgsql.inc started using it first, but that doesn't mean it was designed for them. I see on the pgsql propoganda page a button from Jeff MacDonald with the logo with the note that he "Used Daniel's Elephant", which I believe refers to Daniel Lundin, though I don't recognize that name. Note also that that page indicates that those logo's are for the community, not the corporation, which in essence would mean that the company has posted that the logo is for the community. Robert Treat -- Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: