On Tuesday, 13 October 2020 at 07:02:26 UTC, aberba wrote:
On Monday, 12 October 2020 at 00:43:51 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Sunday, 11 October 2020 at 17:35:26 UTC, 9il wrote:
[snip]
I can't speak to the technical differences between the two. My
understanding is that MIT is more permissive than Boost,
I make all my stuff Boost so that anyone can do whatever they
want with the code. So I'm hoe its not that permissive.
Boost says:
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person or
organization
obtaining a copy of the software and accompanying documentation
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:
MIT says:
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person
obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation
files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without
restriction, including without limitation the rights to use,
copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following
conditions:
The difference is that MIT says you can use it without
restriction, including a few things, while Boost says you can do
some things. I only meant that MIT license was more permissive in
that if there are other things you want to do with it that are
not listed on Boost (I don't know what that would be), then MIT
would allow it.
