bob@proulx.com (Bob Proulx) writes: > Martin Schulze wrote: >> Bob Proulx wrote: >> > 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 How about: Dec 11 Infomagic announces an unreleased Debian 1.0 as official, 1995 or just: Dec 11 Infomagic announces an unreleased Debian 1.0, 1995 -- Kevin
Attachment:
pgpzVRvy3CXQg.pgp
Description: PGP signature