Thanks Beman, >No, including the Boost license doesn't make your source open. There is >nothing in either the new or old Boost licenses which requires that source >code be redistributed or otherwise made available.
I understand the intention and realize that this is the way it has always been. It is wonderful to have great work like boost at the finger tips. "Is my work a derivate work?", I guess is the gist of the question. How do you firewall it? Does a contract with a third party need to address the boundary of boost code (which maybe modified and embedded or not) and the proprietary code. >When you cut-and-paste a bit of copyrighted code into your own code, you've >created a derived work of the copyrighted code. That's the way copyright >law works, even if your code is really large and the cut-and-paste >copyright code is fairly trivial. (Under some circumstances copying a small >portion can be considered "fair use", but that is starting to drift >off-topic.) If a work is a derivate work and you do redistribute, sell or otherwise license your own proprietary _source_ what is the impact of including the following statement? __________ Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person or organization obtaining a copy of the software covered by this license (the "Software") to use, reproduce, display, distribute, execute, and transmit the Software, and to prepare derivative works of the Software, and to permit third-parties to whom the Software is furnished to do so, all subject to the following __________ If I have the desire to license source code, which uses boost code, to a third party, on the basis that my code may not be redistributed then this statement confuses the issue if I am a derivative work. For example, I build a risk system for an asset manager. I use some boost, perhaps modified. I include the license as required... and I get confused trying to separate the consequences in a contract with the third party. I had one such messy contract that took over a year to resolve to mutual agreement :-( Perhaps this is a non issue as the issue may exist for alternative licenses. If you desire to have your derivative work under a different umbrella for source distribution then the issue seems significant to me. Cheers, Matt. PS: does #include <boost/any_old_header.hpp> make you a derived work? _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost