fedora-docs bugs

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, 2004-08-13 at 09:45, Dave Pawson wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-08-13 at 10:47, Hoyt wrote:
> > On Friday 13 August 2004 04:06 am, Colin Charles wrote:
> > > I bring to mind, an FAQ now (not relevant to bug report)... Many users
> > > of FC find usefulness in the Unofficial FAQ. Can we brainstorm here to
> > > find out how we can make this more "official", since Fedora Core itself
> > > is "retarded" without lots of additional multimedia support
> > 
> > The FedoraNews site might be an appropriate venue for the "enhancement" of 
> > Fredora Core. That stuff won't ever be officially sanctioned, but without it, 
> > the enthusiast users are likely to migrate away from FC. I'm seeing some of 
> > that in  my LUG.
> 
> I wonder why RH can't see that? 
> ... no 

I'm pretty sure they can. However, directing people to places where they
can (essentially) violate IP rights may be roughly as actionable as
violating them yourself. Yes, that's a bit over-dramatic, but if you
learn to see this situation the way that Red Hat's legal department
likely does, you'll quickly understand why this is a very tangled
problem.

I think, frankly, directing people to Google is always best, that way
they generally end up with the information they want, and it's up to
them to provide the search parameters. I'm not saying that's the way to
handle official documentation, I'm only saying it's an alternative
that's free of legal entanglements.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE