-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
- --On Thursday, September 27, 2007 10:11:34 -0700 Selena Deckelmann
<sdeckelmann@chrisking.com> wrote:
>> On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:>>>> Hello,>>>> I was just talking with one of my developers (Alexey) and he said, why>> not just use Pg. Which is an interesting point. Consider that>> Volkswagen>> is properly known as Volkswagen but commonly (and most of the time)>> referred to as VW.>>>> Why don't we just stop this whole PostgreSQL->Postgres->Postgre>> junk and>> just say, PostgreSQL, also referred to as PG.>>>> Heck, I know plenty of people that just say PG, or PGSQL, myself>> included.>> +1 I like it.>> From a design standpoint, 'Pg' is nicer. I know we're not there yet, but> just sayin'.Just to clarify, I don't believe JD is advocating *changing the name* to Pg,
only using Pg as the common name vs Postgres ...
Right JD? :)
- ----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (
http://www.hub.org)
Email . [email protected: sc...@hub.org] MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFG++Tf4QvfyHIvDvMRAsXMAJkBZgVaPVWBLm8iZUhEfFD5VWmpoACdEwXt
YPJwZONqbz5JZS++zsjRyrM=
=wIIv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.orgSIGNED