could the "missing codec" redirection be more informative?

[Ed Greshko]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>   on a fresh (and barely configured) f12 system, i tried to view my
> first online .wmv file and was redirected here:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageKit_Items_Not_Found#Missing_Codec
>
> which is moderately informative in terms of telling me what the
> problem is, but utterly useless in terms of telling me how to fix it.
>
>   yes, i realize the issues surrounding codecs, but would it be unduly
> difficult to add to that section some advice on where to *find* such
> codecs?  you know, point readers at rpmfusion or some such?  is that
> not a legally acceptable thing to do?  because that's *exactly* the
> sort of thing that will drive newcomers to fedora totally nuts.
>   
AFAIK, it is not legally acceptable to explicitly tell someone how to
break the law.

I hope nobody starts to argue about how silly they think these laws are.....

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20091123/73561d67/attachment-0001.sig>