On 6/13/2014 4:31 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
It's probably nice to have less restrictive license, but what we aim to achieve
with that?

1. Boost is the least restrictive license

2. Minimize friction for adopting D

3. Harmonization with usage of Boost in the runtime library

4. Allow commercial use of DMDFE (so what if someone does? It'll drive even more adoption of D!)

5. Boost is well known and accepted

Reply via email to