Date: 2000-05-07 14:32:08
Here's a proposal for the requirements for boost compatible
1. Must grant permission to copy, use and modify the software
for any use (commercial and non-commercial) for no fee.
2. Must require that the license appear on all copies of the software
3. May not require that the license appear with executables, etc.
that use the library and may not require that the source code
also be available.
4. May contain restrictions about what is considered the
"Standard Version" of the library. The version available
at the boost cite would be the "Standard Version".
(similar to clauses in the artistic license)
Beman Dawes writes:
> At 12:30 PM 4/26/00 -0500, jsiek_at_[hidden] wrote:
> >In the Boost FAQ is listed a few types of things that disqualify a
> >license from being "boost compatible", but it seems to me the
> >characterization there is somewhat vague and incomplete. I would
> >to see a better description of what qualities a license must have,
> >and the qualities it must not have, to be boost compatible .
> Would you like to propose some improved wording?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk