On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Matt Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 12:44:58AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 12:38:02AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 09:29:07PM -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> > > > It is simply "Red Hat Linux 9", no ".0". Quite similar to "Red
> > > > Hat Linux 7" in the naming aspect.
> > > And I sure do see "7.0" on your FTP server now.... :)
> >
> > Also on this page: <https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/rh7-errata.html>
> > "Red Hat Linux 7.0 General Advisories". So you can see why people may not be
> > taking your nine-point-nothing thing too seriously.
>
> Oops, you caught us. In the interest of being totally transparent,
> "Red Hat Linux 7" was something that happened much closer to its
> release than the Red Hat Linux 9 decision. There weren't many good
> reasons to call it 7 and not 7.0. There ARE good reasons drop the .0
> from Red Hat Linux 9.
>
> It's not a .0 release, it's just the next release.
Ummmm, will the next release (after 9) be called Red Hat Linux 2004? :))
--
.............Tom "Nothing would please me more than being able to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market
with good software." -- Bill Gates 1976
We are still waiting ....
--
Phoebe-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list
