On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Curt Sampson wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
> > PostgreSQL (aka PgSQL aka Postgres aka Pg) ... ppl use all the various
> > forms ...
>
> Having to say that is a very, very good reason to just change the name
> back to "postgres" *everywhere*, and stick with that.
It will *not* happen, so you may as well just drop that part of the
thread.
> > Note that the lists themselves act as their own marketing ...
> > pgsql-*@postgresql.org ... and all the search engines have
> > postgresql.org in them....
>
> Is there a difficulty in using postgres.org instead?
Is there a difficulty in accepting that it will not change?
> > , and, I'm sorry, but someones lame argument about 'whether to search
> > for postgres or postgresql' ... like, come on ... if you have any
> > doubt, just search for postgres, it *is* a sub-string of the formal
> > name
>
> I did search. A search for "postgres" turns up only one quarter of the
> hits, does not turn up the advertisement for postgresql documentation,
> and the second link is to a page called "University POSTGRES 4.2".
Guess you should learn to type 'postgresql' then, eh?
> Now, having done a web search on "pgsql", I can now see your difficulty
> with the name change; you are the president of a company called
> "PostgreSQL Inc." Why didn't you just say this from the beginnning?
Because it was irrelevant? And still is ...