Martin Schulze wrote: > Bob Proulx wrote: > > Apr 1 Bruce Perens became project leader during this month, 1996 > > I don't like adding random dates. Please somebody show me the proof > that Bruce started on April 1st. I never said he started on the first. In fact I said "during this month" which is a pretty broad period of time. Instead of pinning an event on a day I was just pinning it on a month. A month without a day matches on the first of the month. So I should have just said "Apr" instead of "Apr 1", my bad. > > Dec 11 A CDROM manufacturer mistakenly labelled an unreleased version as Debian 1.0, 1995 > > > > But that is so long. Perhaps this works. Taking literary license by > > using today's testing name which I don't think exited then. > > > > Dec 11 A CDROM manufacturer mistakenly shipped 'testing' as Debian 1.0, 1995 > > a) why not name the distributor I was trying to soften the message along the same lines as the web page history. But there is no particular reason not to name them. > b) it was not testing, hence it would be wrong. Yes. As I said, it was literary license trying to shorten the prose. > c) Dec 11th is the date of the announcement not of the shipping, hence it would be wrong. For reference, the calendar file line under discussion. > Dec 11 Infomagic announces the botching of Debian 1.0, 1995 Statements like this sound so spiteful. And in a recurring reminder file? This reads like, "Seven years ago back in 1995 Infomagic screwed things up and we are never going to let them or anyone else forget it to the point of specifically reminding everyone every year of it." Let bygones be bygones. Forgive and forget. Bob
Attachment:
pgpgjkl3cE2sh.pgp
Description: PGP signature