[Important For All Boost Contributors] BSL Status Update
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at: http://stl.nuwen.net/bsl.html 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. Low-hanging fruit is thus revealed: * I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt. Andrei Alexandrescu Gennadiy Rozental Joaquín Mª López Muñoz Vladimir Prus Robert Ramey - http www rrsd com Howard Hinnant Thorsten Ottosen Joel de Guzman (I just compared "Authors we need to move to the BSL" to the last couple of pages of Boost list archives, visually.) * Some people have files under the BSL, but not all of them. Example (I'm picking on him because I've talked to him): Jeff Garland. He's listed as having files under the BSL, and he's not in "Authors we need for the BSL", so he doesn't have any non-BSL files. However, many date_file files are listed in "Files With No Recognisable License". * The following people ARE in blanket-permission.txt, but have used these alternate names in Boost code. Their names should be changed to their canonical forms. (And then the appropriate files should be BSLed.) Dave Abrahams Doug Gregor Dr John Maddock David Moore Jeremy G Siek John R Bandela * "Files that could be converted to the Boost Software License" should be. There are a lot of files there. * Some non-BSL files display copyrights by: Boost org boost org It should be figured out who actually wrote these. I don't think "boost org" is a real organization. * From what I've heard on the list, "William E Kempf" hasn't been seen in quite some time. He should be contacted. * The following organizations (or people with really, really weird names) hold copyrights to non-BSL libraries. They should be contacted. Cadenza New Zealand Ltd CrystalClear Software Inc Free Software Foundation Inc Grenoble Hewlett-Packard Company Housemarque Oy Indiana University Silicon Graphics Computer Systems Inc The Trustees of Indiana University Universite Joseph Fourier University of Notre Dame iMAGIS-GRAVIR UJF uBLAS developers * Why are new libraries, such as Boost Algorithm, being accepted without the BSL? At the very least, Boost could try to not move backwards. * Some files - boost/iterator_adaptors.hpp, a huge (all?) chunk of boost/mpl, and lots of stuff in libs/config/test - have no recognizable copyright holder. That should be fixed. * Maybe bcp could add "Percent Converted" to the report? It'd be nice to see how many files have been converted to the BSL out of how many files there are, total. Stephan T. Lavavej (Microsoft Software Design Engineer who really, really wants to use Boost at work)
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:47:34 -0700, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
* Some people have files under the BSL, but not all of them. Example (I'm picking on him because I've talked to him): Jeff Garland. He's listed as having files under the BSL, and he's not in "Authors we need for the BSL", so he doesn't have any non-BSL files. However, many date_file files are listed in "Files With No Recognisable License".
I love to be picked on ;-) I don't want to rediscuss the lack of licenses in files issue -- see recent archives. However, all code files in date_time have BSL licensing and copyright -- the documents clearly indicate date-time is licesnsed under BSL. Most of the files lacking licenses are html files which will be removed from the 1.32 release before it ships, anyway -- we've converted to boost-book. If you want to add me to the blanket list, no problem.
* From what I've heard on the list, "William E Kempf" hasn't been seen in quite some time. He should be contacted.
The latest discussion is to rewrite Boost.threads -- just about everything has already been tried to reach Bill.
* The following organizations (or people with really, really weird names) hold copyrights to non-BSL libraries. They should be contacted.
Cadenza New Zealand Ltd CrystalClear Software Inc ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is my company and I think date-time is the only place you will find this copyright -- and all of this has been converted to BSL, so I'm thinking there is a problem with the audit. But if you need blanket permission for CrystalClear Software copyrighted material, no problem -- I own the company -- it's granted. Jeff
On Jul 24, 2004, at 9:31 PM, Jeff Garland wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:47:34 -0700, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote
CrystalClear Software Inc ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is my company and I think date-time is the only place you will find this copyright -- and all of this has been converted to BSL, so I'm thinking there is a problem with the audit. But if you need blanket permission for CrystalClear Software copyrighted material, no problem -- I own the company -- it's granted.
Looks like the culprit is this file, which has a non-BSL license: libs/date_time/src/posix_time/posix_time_types.cpp Anyway, I've made a few fixes to recognize more license variations. That should cut down on the false alarms a bit. Doug
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 23:21:48 -0500, Doug Gregor wrote
On Jul 24, 2004, at 9:31 PM, Jeff Garland wrote: Looks like the culprit is this file, which has a non-BSL license:
libs/date_time/src/posix_time/posix_time_types.cpp
Anyway, I've made a few fixes to recognize more license variations. That should cut down on the false alarms a bit.
Yeah, I noticed that outlyer after I sent the mail -- I fixed it in CVS. Jeff
On Jul 24, 2004, at 8:47 PM, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
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.
Thanks!
* The following people ARE in blanket-permission.txt, but have used these alternate names in Boost code. Their names should be changed to their canonical forms. (And then the appropriate files should be BSLed.)
Doug Gregor
This one should now be fixed...
* "Files that could be converted to the Boost Software License" should be. There are a lot of files there.
I'll see if I can come up with a program to do this automagically. We have to be _very_ careful with this, though.
* Some non-BSL files display copyrights by:
Boost org boost org It should be figured out who actually wrote these. I don't think "boost org" is a real organization.
I'll take care of this.
* From what I've heard on the list, "William E Kempf" hasn't been seen in quite some time. He should be contacted.
If we could, we would.
* The following organizations (or people with really, really weird names) hold copyrights to non-BSL libraries. They should be contacted.
Free Software Foundation Inc
They're not going to agree to the BSL, that's for sure :) This only affects the Graphviz parser in the BGL, which is due for a rewrite soon anyway.
Indiana University
Looking into this...
The Trustees of Indiana University
Same as above.
University of Notre Dame
Also looking into this,
uBLAS developers
I doubt this is a legal entity...
* Why are new libraries, such as Boost Algorithm, being accepted without the BSL? At the very least, Boost could try to not move backwards.
We should make this a requirement, I think.
* Some files - boost/iterator_adaptors.hpp, a huge (all?) chunk of boost/mpl, and lots of stuff in libs/config/test - have no recognizable copyright holder. That should be fixed.
Probably just a form of license not matched by one of the regexes in bcp. Easily fixed, with a little time investment.
* Maybe bcp could add "Percent Converted" to the report? It'd be nice to see how many files have been converted to the BSL out of how many files there are, total.
Sure, but it might be more useful to have that scorecard showing which libraries are completely under the BSL. Both are easy enough to implement. Doug
Le dim 25/07/2004 à 03:47, Stephan T. Lavavej a écrit :
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
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.
The results are a bit off. In particular, files under the BSL are not correctly detected. For example, except for a header file (and .html files but that's another problem), the Boost.Interval library is under the BSL but has "no recognisable licence information" according to the report. So it needs to be reminded that the correct way to express the BSL is this one (just look at more/license_info.html): // Copyright 2004 Joe Coder. Distributed under the Boost // Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying file // LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt) The one actually detected (I suppose) is this one, which was seemingly discarded at the time the license was discussed: // Copyright (c) 2004 Joe Coder. Use, modification and distribution is // subject to the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying // file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt) If you want the details on why the first comment was better than second, just search the archive around February 2004. I only wanted to point out that the report is a bit misleading. Regards, Guillaume
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 18:47:34 -0700, "Stephan T. Lavavej" <stl@nuwen.net> wrote:
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
Following Guillaume... info about dynamic_bitset are erroneous too. AFAICT all dynamic_bitset files (including docs and examples) use the BSL, with the currently approved reference text ("Distributed under..."). -- Genny.
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
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.
Low-hanging fruit is thus revealed:
* I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt.
Andrei Alexandrescu Gennadiy Rozental Joaquín Mª López Muñoz Vladimir Prus Robert Ramey - http www rrsd com Howard Hinnant Thorsten Ottosen Joel de Guzman
(I just compared "Authors we need to move to the BSL" to the last couple of pages of Boost list archives, visually.)
* Some people have files under the BSL, but not all of them. Example (I'm
I'll look into it. BTW if you run bcp on a lib subdirectory, you'll get all the dependencies of that lib's *test code*. That should include all the headers (one would hope!), but it often includes a lot more as well (like Boost.Test for example). picking on him because I've talked to him): Jeff Garland. He's listed as having files under the BSL, and he's not in "Authors we need for the BSL", so he doesn't have any non-BSL files. However, many date_file files are listed in "Files With No Recognisable License". Some of the regexes need updating to pick out the right wording, I just haven't had a chance recently.
* Some files - boost/iterator_adaptors.hpp, a huge (all?) chunk of boost/mpl, and lots of stuff in libs/config/test - have no recognizable copyright holder. That should be fixed.
They are machine generated, some by scripts, some by the C preprocessor, I'm still unsure how to handle these. Thanks! John.
"Stephan T. Lavavej" <stl@nuwen.net> writes:
* The following people ARE in blanket-permission.txt, but have used these alternate names in Boost code. Their names should be changed to their canonical forms. (And then the appropriate files should be BSLed.)
Dave Abrahams
No time for that since I'm "on vacation", but I did add my alias to blanket-permissions.txt. Cheers, -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
On Jul 24, 2004, at 9:47 PM, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
* I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt.
Howard Hinnant
I'm happy to add myself to blanket-permission.txt, I just don't know how. -Howard
On Jul 25, 2004, at 11:43 AM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
"Stephan T. Lavavej" <stl@nuwen.net> wrote
* I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt. Thorsten Ottosen
Please do :-)
If you have CVS write access, it you be best if you add yourself to the file. Otherwise, please reply with a more self-contained message we can reference, such as: "I give permission to apply the Boost Software License, Version 1.0 to all of my Boost contributions" and be sure to have your full name in your signature somewhere. It's a pain, sure, but we need to be careful with this. Doug
On Jul 25, 2004, at 3:40 PM, Doug Gregor wrote:
If you have CVS write access, it you be best if you add yourself to the file.
I don't have CVS write access.
Otherwise, please reply with a more self-contained message we can reference, such as:
"I give permission to apply the Boost Software License, Version 1.0 to all of my Boost contributions"
and be sure to have your full name in your signature somewhere. It's a pain, sure, but we need to be careful with this.
I give permission to apply the Boost Software License, Version 1.0 to all of my Boost contributions. Howard Hinnant
"Doug Gregor" <dgregor@cs.indiana.edu> wrote in message news:6E971327-DE72-11D8-9E5B-000D932B7224@cs.indiana.edu... | If you have CVS write access, it you be best if you add yourself to the | file. ok. doing it... br Thorsten
Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
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.
Low-hanging fruit is thus revealed:
* I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt.
Joel de Guzman
Fine by me. No problem. -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Joel de Guzman wrote:
Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
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.
Low-hanging fruit is thus revealed:
* I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt.
Joel de Guzman
Fine by me. No problem.
I give permission to apply the Boost Software License, Version 1.0 to all of my Boost contributions. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Joel de Guzman wrote:
Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
I figured out how to use bcp. See the results at:
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.
Low-hanging fruit is thus revealed:
* I know I've seen the following people post to the Boost list recently. They should be contacted about adding themselves to blanket-permission.txt.
Joel de Guzman Fine by me. No problem.
I give permission to apply the Boost Software License, Version 1.0 to all of my Boost contributions.
Joel, please edit your name into more/blanket-permission.txt -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Joel de Guzman
Fine by me. No problem.
I give permission to apply the Boost Software License, Version 1.0 to all of my Boost contributions.
Joel,
please edit your name into more/blanket-permission.txt
Ehmm... it's already done :) Thanks to whoever did it. -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Hi, On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 06:47:34PM -0700, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote:
* Why are new libraries, such as Boost Algorithm, being accepted without the BSL? At the very least, Boost could try to not move backwards.
Sorry about this. I have forgotten to change licence in two files. Old licence was there only by mistake and it is fixed now. Pavol.
participants (3)
-
David Abrahams -
Doug Gregor -
Gennaro Prota -
Guillaume Melquiond -
Howard Hinnant -
Jeff Garland -
Joel de Guzman -
John Maddock -
Pavol Droba -
Stephan T. Lavavej -
Thorsten Ottosen