Re: [boost] [Important For All Boost Contributors] BSL Status Update
[Stephan T. Lavavej]
I ran it on all of the directory names in libs, in current Boost CVS, except for CVS, python, and serialization - the last two gave errors.
[Doug Gregor]
Thanks!
Sure. I had to copy a .css file to a different directory to get bcp to work in the first place. I don't know why bcp was complaining about python and serialization, and I didn't know enough to hack around it. [Stephan T. Lavavej]
The following people ARE in blanket-permission.txt, but have used these alternate names in Boost code. Doug Gregor
[Doug Gregor]
This one should now be fixed...
Great! [Stephan T. Lavavej]
* "Files that could be converted to the Boost Software License" should be. There are a lot of files there.
[Doug Gregor]
I'll see if I can come up with a program to do this automagically. We have to be _very_ careful with this, though.
Ok. I agree, that's something that can't be screwed up. [Stephan T. Lavavej]
I don't think "boost org" is a real organization.
[Doug Gregor]
I'll take care of this.
Awesome! [Stephan T. Lavavej]
* The following organizations (or people with really, really weird names) hold copyrights to non-BSL libraries. They should be contacted. Free Software Foundation Inc
[Doug Gregor]
They're not going to agree to the BSL, that's for sure :)
The Boost site says that all libraries in Boost, even those not under the BSL, conform to Boost licensing requirements (which excludes the GPL and friends). So the FSF code in Boost shouldn't be under the GPL or any of its derivatives. From my decidedly non-lawyer point of view, the BSL is just a precise statement of the Boost licensing requirements. So the FSF may not be ideologically opposed to BSL conversion. But I don't know what the FSF code in Boost is actually licensed under.
This only affects the Graphviz parser in the BGL, which is due for a rewrite soon anyway.
Ok. This does not personally affect me (I'm real interested in bind and smart_ptr for work), but it should be cleared up. Thanks for looking into some of the [quasi-]organizations I listed.
We should make this a requirement, I think.
Agreed.
Probably just a form of license not matched by one of the regexes in bcp. Easily fixed, with a little time investment.
it might be more useful to have that scorecard showing which libraries are completely under the BSL. Both are easy enough to implement.
Such a scorecard would be excellent (something to point Microsoft's Big Scary Lawyers at). Thanks for your continuing great work! Stephan T. Lavavej
And of course please don't forget to look at: http://www.boost.org/regression-logs/inspection_report.html and http://www.boost.org/regression-logs/license_report.html -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq
Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
They're not going to agree to the BSL, that's for sure :)
The Boost site says that all libraries in Boost, even those not under the BSL, conform to Boost licensing requirements (which excludes the GPL and friends).
So the FSF code in Boost shouldn't be under the GPL or any of its derivatives. From my decidedly non-lawyer point of view, the BSL is just a precise statement of the Boost licensing requirements. So the FSF may not be ideologically opposed to BSL conversion.
But I don't know what the FSF code in Boost is actually licensed under.
GPL, with the following exception: /* As a special exception, when this file is copied by Bison into a Bison output file, you may use that output file without restriction. This special exception was added by the Free Software Foundation in version 1.24 of Bison. */ Which in my naive view amounts to public domain. - Volodya
Vladimir Prus wrote: [...]
GPL, with the following exception:
/* As a special exception, when this file is copied by Bison into a Bison output file, you may use that output file without restriction. This special exception was added by the Free Software Foundation in version 1.24 of Bison. */
Which in my naive view amounts to public domain.
The entire FSF's code base is most likely in quasi "public domain" given that the penalty for copyright misuse is severe copyright impotence. Viagra resistant. regards, alexander.
participants (8)
-
Alexander Terekhov -
Rene Rivera -
Stephan T. Lavavej -
Vladimir Prus