On Wednesday, Jul 2, 2003, at 02:42 America/Denver, Paul A. Bristow
wrote:
| In non-Boost code, I've seen wording something like "See the attached
| license; if it is missing see www.foo.org/license." Maybe something
like
| that is what will be recommended.
|
| They've already signed off on the c
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Beman Dawes
| Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 7:23 PM
| To: Boost mailing list; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: RE: [boost] Draft of new Boost Software License
|
|
| In non-Boost code, I've seen wo
At 09:53 AM 6/26/2003, William E. Kempf wrote:
>Paul A. Bristow said:
>
>> And:
>>
>> // (C) Jane Programmer, 2003
>> // See www.boost.org/license for license terms and conditions
>> // See www.boost.org/libs/janes-lib for documentation
>>
>> Looks fine to me, though I prefer "Copyright" to (
At 10:27 PM 6/26/2003, Howard Hinnant wrote:
>On Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 07:51 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
>
>> A copyright, unlike a patent, just applies to the actual
>> representation. So unless another implementation actually made a
>> literal copy of the Boost code, the other implementation w
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>
> // (C) Jane Programmer, 2003
> // See www.boost.org/license for license terms and conditions
> // See www.boost.org/libs/janes-lib for documentation
>
> Looks fine to me, though I prefer "Copyright" to (C)
>
> Paul
I have been told by previ
On Thursday, Jun 26, 2003, at 07:53 America/Denver, William E. Kempf
wrote:
...
But it would be nice to just refer to the license instead of repeating
it
in every single file.
Though this license is brief enough that inclusion is no big deal.
It seems that doing it by reference to a web page amo
Paul A. Bristow said:
>
>
> | -Original Message-
> | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rene Rivera
> | Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:26 PM
> | To: Boost mailing list
> | Subject: Re: [boost] Draft of new Boost Software License
>
On Thursday, June 26, 2003, at 07:51 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
A copyright, unlike a patent, just applies to the actual
representation. So unless another implementation actually made a
literal copy of the Boost code, the other implementation would not be
a derived work of the Boost code and so wo
At 09:18 AM 6/26/2003, Howard Hinnant wrote:
>Since boost is a spring board for standardization of a library, I'm
>wondering if the boost license requires the copyright notice to follow
>for other implementations which follow the interface of the boost
>library, but independently develop the imple
At 07:35 AM 6/26/2003, Matt Hurd wrote:
>"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.
Serious answer
Since boost is a spring board for standardization of a library, I'm
wondering if the boost license requires the copyright notice to follow
for other implementations which follow the interface of the boost
library, but independently develop the implementation?
In other words, if we standardize a
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. I
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rene Rivera
| Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:26 PM
| To: Boost mailing list
| Subject: Re: [boost] Draft of new Boost Software License
|
| Spanish is my first, but English is a very close second
At 03:25 PM 6/25/2003, Rene Rivera wrote:
>...
>>* Boosters for whom English isn't their primary language; is the license
>>understandable?
>
>Spanish is my first, but English is a very close second. The impression I
>got is that it's somewhat hard to parse as it is. I had to read the
second
>"p
At 03:43 PM 6/25/2003, Maciej Sobczak wrote:
>Well, I have a question.
>I understand that the text of this license is primarily intended to be
>used by Boost libraries and those that are candidates to be included in
>Boost.
>However, apart from the main Boost effort, some of the Boosters or just
>
At 03:17 PM 6/25/2003, Ronald Garcia wrote:
>...
>
>In reading the license, I think the definition of "Software" needs to be
>broadened to explicitly include the documentation, test suites, etc.
>see: >http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php for an example.
I'll pass that on to the lawy
At 06:31 PM 6/25/2003, Matt Hurd wrote:
>>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:
>
>
>I am a little
>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:
I am a little confused. Like Jaarko, I read it as viral.
If
Hi Beman & others,
One thing is slightly confusing. The second paragraph says:
The copyright notice in the Software and this entire statement,
_including the above license grant_,
this restriction and the following disclaimer, must be included ...
The author of a derivative work can put
[2003-06-25] Rene Rivera wrote:
>must be included, in whole or in part, in all copies of the Software, and
>all derivative works of the Software.
Oops, that should be: "...must me included in all... of the Software, in
whole or in part.
It just goes to show how hard it can be to understand this
> My preference is for there to be a single license file in the
> boost root
> directory, and each file covered include a link. So a source
> code file
> might contain something like:
>
> // (C) Jane Programmer, 2003
> //
> // See www.boost.org/license for license terms and conditions
> //
>
> My preference is for there to be a single license file in the
> boost root
> directory, and each file covered include a link. So a source
> code file
> might contain something like:
>
> // (C) Jane Programmer, 2003
> //
> // See www.boost.org/license for license terms and conditions
> //
Hi,
Beman Dawes wrote:
Thanks to Dave Abrahams, Diane Cabell, Devin Smith, and Eva Chen, we now
have a pretty close to final draft of a new Boost Software License.
The draft license itself is at
http://boost.sourceforge.net/misc/LICENSE.txt
Wow!
While we are interested in comments from any Boo
[2003-06-25] Beman Dawes wrote:
>For more background, including rationale, a FAQ, and acknowledgements, see
>http://boost.sourceforge.net/misc/license-background.html
Nice.
>* Boosters for whom English isn't their primary language; is the license
>understandable?
Spanish is my first, but Engl
On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Beman Dawes wrote:
> Thanks to Dave Abrahams, Diane Cabell, Devin Smith, and Eva Chen, we now
> have a pretty close to final draft of a new Boost Software License.
>
I am glad to hear that some folks have been working on this. These issues
are quite important and might make
At 01:27 PM 6/25/2003, Paul Mensonides wrote:
>> * Boost developers; if there are aspects of the license that make you
>> hesitate about adopting it, what are the issues?
>
>It looks fine to me Beman. Is this license (once it is completely
>ironed out) supposed to go in each file?
The license is
> * Boost developers; if there are aspects of the license that make you
> hesitate about adopting it, what are the issues?
It looks fine to me Beman. Is this license (once it is completely
ironed out) supposed to go in each file? If so, where do you put the
credentials for who created what? Or
Thanks to Dave Abrahams, Diane Cabell, Devin Smith, and Eva Chen, we now
have a pretty close to final draft of a new Boost Software License.
For as many Boost libraries as possible, the plan is to replace the
individual licenses with the "official" Boost license. Of course, the
developers who h
28 matches
Mail list logo
