Update to FAQ

I don't see the value in referencing a community discussion in the FAQ.
What is the goal for this change?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Joshua D. Drake wrote:

To address naming issue.

--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Joshua proposed:

! In November 2007 a classic Open Source debate took place on whether
! or not to change the name of the PostgreSQL project to Postgres.
! It was decided that Postgres would be an officially recognized
! nickname but that the name would remain PostgreSQL. Postgres was
! the original name of the project at Berkeley and is strongly
! preferred over other nicknames. If you find 'PostgreSQL' hard
! to pronounce, call it 'Postgres' instead.
!

The debate has certainly spread well before (and after) November 2007.
Not sure what makes it a "classic Open Source debate" either. Because
it was debated in the open? I think the "decision" was basically
Core's punting of making the tough but necessary decision to make
the project name pronounceable once again (if I can add some spin
of my own :). If we are going to say "It was decided", we need
to state who (Core) actually did the decreeing / deciding.

In case it wasn't clear, I'm not in support of changing the FAQ
as proposed above.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200804082039
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkf8ELYACgkQvJuQZxSWSsjOdACgn6htAFGYQsM70I3TDkQhM+Nh
pFsAn2fyWe7lNIcHkBnVMcMIBL1xDM7G
=Nxri
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
[ There is text before PGP section. ]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Joshua proposed:

! In November 2007 a classic Open Source debate took place on whether
! or not to change the name of the PostgreSQL project to Postgres.
! It was decided that Postgres would be an officially recognized
! nickname but that the name would remain PostgreSQL. Postgres was
! the original name of the project at Berkeley and is strongly
! preferred over other nicknames. If you find 'PostgreSQL' hard
! to pronounce, call it 'Postgres' instead.
!

The debate has certainly spread well before (and after) November 2007.
Not sure what makes it a "classic Open Source debate" either. Because
it was debated in the open? I think the "decision" was basically
Core's punting of making the tough but necessary decision to make
the project name pronounceable once again (if I can add some spin
of my own :). If we are going to say "It was decided", we need
to state who (Core) actually did the decreeing / deciding.

In case it wasn't clear, I'm not in support of changing the FAQ
as proposed above.

In looking at it now I see the Berkeley sentence isn't necessary so I
just remove it. (It was copied from the documentation.) New text:

<P>Postgres is a widely-used nickname for PostgreSQL. If you find
'PostgreSQL' hard to pronounce, call it 'Postgres' instead.</P>

Shorter is better in the FAQ.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 00:42:07 -0000
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com> wrote:

! In November 2007 a classic Open Source debate took place on
whether ! or not to change the name of the PostgreSQL project to
Postgres. ! It was decided that Postgres would be an officially
recognized ! nickname but that the name would remain PostgreSQL.
Postgres was ! the original name of the project at Berkeley and is
strongly ! preferred over other nicknames. If you find
'PostgreSQL' hard ! to pronounce, call it 'Postgres' instead.
!

The debate has certainly spread well before (and after) November 2007.

The "decision" came down from core in 11/2007 which is why I referenced
it.

Not sure what makes it a "classic Open Source debate" either.

Long winded, full of flames and pointless :P

Because
it was debated in the open? I think the "decision" was basically
Core's punting of making the tough but necessary decision to make
the project name pronounceable once again (if I can add some spin
of my own :). If we are going to say "It was decided", we need
to state who (Core) actually did the decreeing / deciding.

Dave Page:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-advocacy/2007-11/msg00109.php

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

--
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate