The LWN.net 2004 Linux Timeline
This is version 0.9 of the 2004 timeline. If you find any remaining major omissions, please send them to us at timeline@lwn.net; please do not post errors or omissions as comments until after we have had a chance to address them.
The development of the LWN.net Linux Timeline was supported by LWN subscribers; if you like what you see, please consider subscribing to LWN.
As usual, the timeline is split up by month. We apologize that a "one big page" version is not available at this time.
The LWN.net Linux timelines from the last six years are still available:
Posted Dec 30, 2004 18:23 UTC (Thu)
by iabervon (subscriber, #722)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Dec 31, 2004 8:30 UTC (Fri)
by ncm (guest, #165)
[Link]
Posted Jan 2, 2005 15:25 UTC (Sun)
by vmole (guest, #111)
[Link]
The truly sad part is that I've been around Debian so long that I didn't realize he was making a joke...
Posted Jan 6, 2005 12:02 UTC (Thu)
by randy (guest, #1510)
[Link]
Great job, as usual, LWN!
Posted Jan 13, 2005 7:17 UTC (Thu)
by emj (guest, #14307)
[Link]
I still think the "obvious, predictable objection to the inclusion of this utility" line is the funniest thing I heard this year.The LWN.net 2004 Linux Timeline
I guess that would be here.
Obvious, predictable objection
The LWN.net 2004 Linux Timeline
For kicks, everyone really needs to go back and read the previous year's versions. Especially the gloom and doom for Linux quotes from some of the industry "experts". I really like the one stating that Oracle would never support Linux. :) Look back and see how far we've come!The LWN.net 2004 Linux Timeline
Debian Stable I thought that was just servers, I don't see how they would be using Ubuntu.Ubuntu on servers?