From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-20 12:17:27
Ames Andreas wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
>> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Garland
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: [boost] [SoC] License question
>> Hugh Wimberly wrote:
>>> general written in C and are all open-source. Since they're
>> written in C, I
>>> couldn't directly use code anyway, but I'm a little worried
>> about how much I
>>> can use them as a reference since most of them are licensed
>> under the GPL,
>>> and Boost has an incredibly open license that isn't
>> compatible with the GPL.
> IANAL either, but according to
> the latter statement, the one about GPL-compatibility, isn't
That listing has a different view. It tells whether code that has
originally been released under a non-GPL license can be relicensed under
GPL (this is termed "combining", but since GPL is viral, the combined
work has to licensed under GPL, including the formely non-GPL parts).
Boost is a very free license, so this is possible.
However, it is not possible to relicense GPLed code under BSL (unless
you're the copyright holder). The GPL is a lot less free than the Boost
license. This is the what Hugh was talking about.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk