Re: date not respect for 5.8 and 5.9

2016-04-01 Thread bytevolcano
Like, because OpenBSD is for, like, REBELS, mn! Which is like, totally gnarly dude! On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:58:00 +0200 "Max Power" wrote: > Hi guys! > Why the release 5.8 and 5.9 did not comply with the canonical date > of the 1th November and of the 1th May? > > Thanks in advance for your

Re: date not respect for 5.8 and 5.9

2016-03-31 Thread Vivek Vinod
e not respect for 5.8 and 5.9 Hi guys! Why the release 5.8 and 5.9 did not comply with the canonical date of the 1th November and of the 1th May? Thanks in advance for your reply.

Re: date not respect for 5.8 and 5.9

2016-03-31 Thread Daniel Ouellet
On 3/31/16 4:58 AM, Max Power wrote: > Hi guys! > Why the release 5.8 and 5.9 did not comply with the canonical date > of the 1th November and of the 1th May? > > Thanks in advance for your reply. Because Buffy swim upstream with the salmons this year in the cold rivers of Canada and felt he coul

Re: date not respect for 5.8 and 5.9

2016-03-31 Thread Otto Moerbeek
Max Power schreef op 31 maart 2016 10:58:00 CEST: >Hi guys! >Why the release 5.8 and 5.9 did not comply with the canonical date >of the 1th November and of the 1th May? > >Thanks in advance for your reply. Because we are Time Lords? -Otto

date not respect for 5.8 and 5.9

2016-03-31 Thread Max Power
Hi guys! Why the release 5.8 and 5.9 did not comply with the canonical date of the 1th November and of the 1th May? Thanks in advance for your reply.