could the "missing codec" redirection be more informative?

[Rex Dieter]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

>   oh, balls.  a page from fedoraproject.org:
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/OtherRepositories
> 
> *explicitly* refers readers to rpmfusion.org, for the following
> reason:
> 
> "There are a number of third-party software repositories for Fedora
> that provide software packages that Fedora excludes for various
> reasons. These software repositories are not officially affiliated or
> endorsed by the Fedora Project. Use them at your own discretion."
> 
> are you seriously suggesting that it would now be legally problematic
> to go here:
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageKit_Items_Not_Found#Missing_Codec

Yes.  Other repositories can be mentioned, but only if particulars about 
their contents not be mentioned. (That was the guideline laid out by fedora 
legal).  Else, it risks contributory infringement.  IANAL, and all that.

-- Rex