[dxdm]

How do you know it's not SQL-lite with the single L serving a double role?

Common pronunciations allow you to stay perfectly ambiguous about where the L goes, which aligns quite well with the name as spelled. If you do it right, nobody can tell if you're saying sequel-ite or sequel-lite or seque-lite on the one hand, or S-Q-L-ite or S-Q-L-lite or S-Q-lite on the other.

AFAIK there is no official word on how the name is intended to be read or said.

[richie_adler]

Richard Hipp says he doesn't care how anybody pronunces it. That said, he pronounces it "S-Q-L-ite".

[satvikpendem]

Because the creator himself said it's an -ite suffix similar to minerals like bauxite, not -lite.

[dxdm]

Interesting, thanks for mentioning that. I've always wondered about the origins of the name, never found anything, but now with your mention of "mineral" I was able to find this:

> (Hipp) How do I pronounce the name of the product? I say S-Q-L-ite, like a mineral.

> But I also hear a lot people say, "Sequel lite and SQL lite." You know, I don't care. Whatever comes off of your tongue easily is fine with me.

> (Q) But the official correct way is S-Q-L-ite?

> (Hipp) Yes, like a mineral.

https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-changelog/why-sqlit...

So, he means SQL-ite, but doesn't want to proscribe this as the only way people should say it. I like all of that.

Maybe we should follow his example.