Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Dropping postgres as a whole.

John Wang wrote:
> On 9/27/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
>
> An issue with PG (or Pg) is that it is used for other things with about 170m
> Google hits.
>
> One use of PG is as an abbreviation of Proctor & Gamble, a Fortune 25
> company at pg.com and the PG stock symbol. Coincidentally, they are one of
> the big practitioners of brand management.
>
> Would this be similar to naming a software project GM, a la General Motors?

Interesting point but I don't think that would be a problem in general.
Mainly because as good as we are... we are not Proctor & Gamble ;). Nor
are we even in the same sector (business/financial etc...).

I like Pg but I would also not be opposed to pgsql, which is extremely
common.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake




- --

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/
   UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/