On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:07:26PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 04:56:05PM +0000, Dave Page wrote: > >> --- a/COPYRIGHT > >> +++ b/COPYRIGHT > >> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > >> PostgreSQL Database Management System > >> -(formerly known as Postgres, then as Postgres95) > >> +(also known as Postgres, formerly as Postgres95) > >> > >> Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2025, PostgreSQL Global Development Group > > > I'm not seeing this change as aligned with > > https://www.postgresql.org/about/policies/project-name/, which says Postgres > > "is an alias or nickname and is not the official name of the project." The > > official product name did change Postgres -> Postgres95 -> PostgreSQL, with > > "Postgres" holding the status of a nickname since Postgres95 became the > > official name. Today's text matches that history, and the proposed text > > doesn't. Can you share more from the brief discussion? Changing a license > > file is an eyebrow-raising event, so we should do it only if the win is > > clear. > > There may be an argument for making this change, but I'm missing it > > currently. > > PGCAC holds trademarks on both "PostgreSQL" and "Postgres". We've > been given legal advice that both terms need to be in current use > to preserve the trademarks. Which they are and have been, but the > present wording in COPYRIGHT doesn't align with that. The website > phrasing will be adjusted as well.
I'm good with the change, then.
