> I would not mind to change my copyrights to use different wording --- either > the one from function library or the "standard" one. The only problem is > that > > boost/graph/transitive_closure.hpp > > is generated from > > libs/graph/doc/transitive_closure.w > > and only Jeremy knows how. > > And related note: probably the text of "standard" license should be placed > somewhere and you could suggest that "standard" license to authors which > used something different, instead for suggesting to use any license > currently used? Of course, it must be settled what "standard" is.
I think I probably jumped the gun a little here: there's going to some discussion around here real soon now about a "standard" boost licence for new code. At present I've been trying to flag up files that have licences that are *almost* completely identical to common ones used elsewhere in boost, but which are just different enough to be separate legal entities (well probably anyway<g>). If you want to either hold off any changes for a while that's completely OK; your existing licence is perfectly boost compatible, it's just um, well "unique". I'll also try and post a rundown of what licences are actually in use right now, one I've got my code a bit more complete. Regards, John. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
