fedora-docs bugs

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, 2004-08-13 at 13:30, Dave Pawson wrote:
> > > 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.
> I don't understand.

Actionable = someone could start a legal action against Red Hat. If I am
a corporate entity that directs you to resources that allow you to
knowingly violate Karsten's IP rights, then Karsten may have a legal
claim against me. Since I'm not an attorney, I don't know on what
exactly that claim would be predicated, but I do know that I would like
to avoid that risk where possible.

> > 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.
> 
> And if it leads to yours or my website,
> then 'customers' will be happy?
>   +1
> Who gives a monkeys if its on RH website?
> Just because that's where customers expect it.

I can't tell from your verbiage whether you're agreeing or not. :-)
Customers' expectations for a free, community-supported product should
be reasonable. Just because a doc's not on Red Hat's site doesn't
invalidate it. The Fedora Docs Project is not going to be one-stop
shopping for everything Fedora-related. There will always be other sites
that have a particular focus or specialty.

> When using Python,
> I find it quicker to use google to find 
> documentation than using the actual documentation index.

Does this mean we agree? I'm sorry, now I'm confused! :-)

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE