| From: | Ron Peterson <ron(dot)peterson(at)yellowbank(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Date: | 2007-09-04 00:57:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20070904005733.GD11274@yellowbank.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-de-allgemein |
2007-09-03_16:53:20-0400 Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>:
> Yes, it'll give us a name that's pronouncable and not confusing.
I would guess that the vast majority of communication about the product
is written, not spoken.
I think PostgreSQL looks better, and looks should matter more... ;)
--
Ron Peterson
https://www.yellowbank.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2007-09-04 02:45:44 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Previous Message | Ron Peterson | 2007-09-04 00:50:36 | Re: [CORE] Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Treat | 2007-09-04 02:45:44 | Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |
| Previous Message | Ron Peterson | 2007-09-04 00:50:36 | Re: [CORE] Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) |