Subject: Re: [boost] LLVM license compatibility with BSL
From: Vladimir Prus (vladimir_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-28 10:34:52
David Abrahams wrote:
> At Tue, 28 Sep 2010 10:34:58 +0100,
> Anthony Williams wrote:
>> John Maddock <boost.regex_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> >> I have found quite useful to adapt the test for llvm/libc++
>> >> ratio/chrono to test Boost.Ratio and Boost.Chrono.
>> >> But Anthony has signaled me that maybe there is a compatibility
>> >> problem with the license included in these files.
>> > The following requirement on that license:
>> > * Binaries derived from LLVM must reproduce the copyright notice
>> > (e.g. in an included readme file).
>> > Is incompatible with the BSL.
>> That was my concern. However, this is *test* code. Do we require the BSL
>> (or a compatible license) for the tests as well as the main library
> IIRC, we require the BSL (exactly) for all code in Boost.
Can you give a link to such requirement, and to mailing list discussion about
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