On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 00:42:07 -
"Greg Sabino Mullane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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
> recog
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.
>
-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 bu
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.com
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/do
I have update the first section of the FAQ:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ.html
In particular:
o reordered items to be more logical
o added clarification of license
o added section about bug reporting replies
o added section of feature request
