> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matthew Hannigan [mailto:mha73@qantas.com.au]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 1999 4:39 AM
> > To: linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> > Subject: Re: *** Draft 5 - Press Release ***
> >
> > And definitely don't mention y2k -- any mention
> > of current "compliance" suggests former non-compliance.
> > Not a good thing.
>
> No. y2k compliance *must* be mentioned. Anyone starting to
> use a product nowadays will want to know whether it is compliant.
> Not referring to it in a press release will appear a little
> suspicious...
>
> It should be referred to, and also the fact that Linux has *always*
> been compliant. That solves the problem. :)
Something like:
"Unlike many other Operating Systems, Linux has been Year 2000 compatible
for almost xx years."
xx = 1.3 or so?!
/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/