Re: The naming question (Postgres vs PostgreSQL) - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

Brian,

I respectfully disagree.  It can’t just be the maintainers that make the decision.  In reality, there should be a marketing board for Postgres and those folks should make the decision in coordination with all parties involved including those who would have to change doc, those who would have to change code, etc.  I know advocacy was supposed to be the marketing-like group, but it is too big of a group with too many opinions that don’t matter, mine included.

What we should do (here comes my marketing speak) is talk to those who matter, USERS.  There is an old saying in marketing:  Your opinion, though interesting, is irrelevant.  The reality is that we are all on the “inside” and are too jaded.  If PostgreSQL were a company, we would talk to analysts, customers, prospects, etc. and make a decision based on that.

Sorry, went a little corporate there…

Magnus Hagander wrote:

Joshua D. Drake wrote:

Hello,

Before anyone goes down this path too far it is very important that I

disclose (as I have on multiple occasions before) that Command Prompt

owns the name Postgres, Inc (and domains postgresinc.com/net/org).

Although we do not have intention to immediately change our name, I will

note that if the project changes its name, it increases the possibility

that we may do so.

First, thanks for letting us know this before people get too settled on

something :) At least those of us who missed it last time(s)...

Second, this makes my own vote much easier: a clear -1 on the change

(unless cmd would be donating that name+domains to the pg fund or

something, but given that you didn't suggest that I don't expect that to

happen)

I'm -1 as well, although I'm mainly a "those who have to do the work get to decide if, when, and how the work gets done".  I.e. that only the project maintainers should get to vote.

Brian