Re: [CORE] Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL)

2007-09-03_15:52:14-0400 Andy Astor <andy.astor@enterprisedb.com>:

> As I see it, -advocacy is the group most interested in the public face
> of PostgreSQL, and is very appropriate for this kind of debate.

Well, you could subtract me from that assessment.  It doesn't take much
to simply join a maillist.  I just stumbled into this list for purely
selfish reasons: I was looking for feedback on an article I was
submitting, and happened upon this discussion.  (I recieved none, BTW.)
I certainly do have an opinion on the subject, but I must be honest -
I'm really the last person who should have any say in the matter.  So
subtract me from the -advocacy group who should matter.  Anyone else
care to abrogate their authority?  Who _really_ stands to lose or gain
the most here?  Not me, I'll say that.

I still think the people best qualified to say what should be done are
the people who have demonstrably already done the most; and that would
core.  I'd also listen to the people who have been spending their own
time and money traveling, speaking, and otherwise hinging their
livelyhood on this project - but that's a much harder boundry to
delimit.  I don't think anyone would argue with a pronouncment from
core.  I think no matter what the decision, if it were made by any other
group, it would lack gravity, and lead to resentments.

I must say that it is at least funny to watch people getting frustrated
and sputtering while they try to rationalize irrational political
problems.

BTW, the best color is red.  Blue is stupid.

--
Ron Peterson
https://www.yellowbank.com/