Some more background on the biggest mistake Postgres ever made: http://www.craigkerstiens.com/2018/10/30/postgres-biggest-mistake/ …
-
-
Replying to @pwramsey @craigkerstiens
Historically, the folks proposing to change the name (post-2006) were never willing to do the actual work required, which is substantial. They always wanted someone else to do the work (1/3)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
why not just update the marketing pages and leave the code as-is?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Because that would just confuse the heck out of people?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
...who? maintainers & contributors already know both names are interchangeable. seems like all that's needed is: - update marketing to say Postgres - add an entry in a FAQ explaining the name change - link to the FAQ in the contributing guidelines
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
... and responses like yours are exactly why the change didn't happen in 2009. Anyway, not my job anymore. I work on a different unpronounceable project now.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
seriously though, why wouldn't that work? it's significantly less effort and doesn't attempt to hide the fact that there's been multiple names over the years
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Also requires everyone to change the name of config files etc (postgresql.conf). That in turn requires tooling changes. Obviously doable, but ...
-
-
Replying to @pwramsey @seanlinsley and
I was more thinking of random ansible/salt/whatnot scripts, auto-failover tools, etc than build artifacts. I find the name unfortunate, but it also ranks far far down on the list of things I think it's useful to invest a lot of energy into personally.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.