From: Paul A. Bristow (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-11-16 05:18:11
This probably cost as much to write as the software!
But it doesn't say anything different from the simple version
in my view, except it _requires_ acknowledgement.
Is this essential - it would be most dis-courteous not to of course,
but is it necessary to make it essential? If a project contains
very many software elements, acknowledge might become a significant burden.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wb_at_[hidden] [mailto:wb_at_[hidden]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 11:49 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Request for license review
> I am writing, in response to a request from my management, to ask
> assistance from knowledgeable Boosters regarding specific software
> licensing terms and conditions.
> My employer, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, has for years made
> its software available under a licensing program known locally as
> Fermitools. The most recent legal details of this are available at
> Because I have software that I wish to contribute to Boost, I have been
> trying to obtain permission to do so. The above Fermitools license has
> now been suggested to me as appropriate for this purpose, but I would
> appreciate explicit confirmation from Boosters to ensure that these
> licensing terms are indeed acceptable. If it happens, for any reason,
> not to be an appropriate license, I would equally appreciate, to the
> extent possible, detailed comments regarding any specific concerns this
> license would engender in the Boost community.
> I hope to present, on Monday morning, a summary to my management of
> Boosters' responses to the proposed licensing terms, and extend my
> sincere thanks in advance to those who are in a position to review and
> address the proposal.
> - WEB
> Info: http://www.boost.org Unsubscribe:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk