Thread

  1. Re: [INTERFACES] Announcing PgSQL - a Python DB-API 2.0 compliant interface to PostgreSQL

    Billy G. Allie <bill.allie@mug.org> — 2000-10-10T20:45:43Z

    Peter Eisentraut wrote:
    > Billy G. Allie writes:
    > 
    > > PgSQL v1.0 has been released.  This is the first public release of PgSQL.
    > > It is available at http://sourceforge.net/projects/pgsql.
    > 
    > Sounds interesting, but isn't "pgsql" an extremely unfortunate choice of
    > name, given that it's already used as an abbreviation for "PostgreSQL"?
    > 
    > -- 
    > Peter Eisentraut      peter_e@gmx.net       http://yi.org/peter-e/
    > 
    
    PgSQL is the name of the module you import in Python to access a PostgreSQL
    database from Python using the DB-API 2.0.  The project name on SourceForge
    is "Python Interface to PostgreSQL".  Of course, it there is too much heart
    burn with the modules name, I can change it.
    ___________________________________________________________________________
    ____       | Billy G. Allie    | Domain....: Bill.Allie@mug.org
    |  /|      | 7436 Hartwell     | Compuserve: 76337,2061
    |-/-|----- | Dearborn, MI 48126| MSN.......: B_G_Allie@email.msn.com
    |/  |LLIE  | (313) 582-1540    | 
    
    
  2. Re: [INTERFACES] Announcing PgSQL - a Python DB-API 2.0 compliant interface to PostgreSQL

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2000-10-10T21:06:40Z

    "Billy G. Allie" <Bill.Allie@mug.org> writes:
    > Peter Eisentraut wrote:
    >> Sounds interesting, but isn't "pgsql" an extremely unfortunate choice of
    >> name, given that it's already used as an abbreviation for "PostgreSQL"?
    
    > PgSQL is the name of the module you import in Python to access a PostgreSQL
    > database from Python using the DB-API 2.0.  The project name on SourceForge
    > is "Python Interface to PostgreSQL".  Of course, it there is too much heart
    > burn with the modules name, I can change it.
    
    FWIW, my initial reaction was the same as Peter's: that name is certain
    to cause confusion.  I don't want to try to force you to change it, but
    I think it's not a good choice.
    
    Don't have a better alternative to offer offhand, however.
    
    			regards, tom lane