On Sun, 2006-11-12 at 12:17 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * Duncan Mac-Vicar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [11-12-06 11:57]: > ... > > Your theory fails becauseyou start wrong assumptions. > > Isn't the time table also inaccurate? Isn't the present schedule based > loosely on _eight_ months?
The time frame has been increased, I think, to 8-9 months instead of 6. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
