>The author of a derivative work can put in a more restrictive license >right? In this case, wording that gives the full Boost permission must >still be included according to the draft license. >This would lead to a license text like: <snip>
I am a little confused. Like Jaarko, I read it as viral. If you produced a derivative work, or copy paste a little code, then you are bound to include the boost license which makes your source open as well... Seems akin to LGPL. Is this the intention or have I misread it? Regards, Matt. Australian is my native tongue... _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
