John Maddock wrote:
> [version...]
>
> Not sure about this one, shouldn't a library have a single version
> number?
It's not the library version, but the document version. In some cases,
they are not the same (e.g. an article). But, yeah.
> [copywrite...][authors...]
>
> These would be useful to have: especially for "meta-libraries" like
> Boost.Math which has many sub-components by different authors.
Spirit too has sub-components by different authors. I'm not sure
how to allow per-file authorship in DocBook though.
> [license...]
>
> Given that everything should be under the same license (as far as Boost is
> concerned anyway), having more than one such block just complicates things.
I think the intent here is to have a license in each individual
qbk file. However, of course, this can be written as a comment:
[/
Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
(See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at
[EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt])
]
Regards,
--
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
