Re: [boost] Licence Proliferation (background and explanation)

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-20 08:30:53

At 08:49 AM 6/15/2003, John Maddock wrote:

 >I've been working on an automated tool to extract and present a list of
 >boost licences in effect for a given boost library (or collection of
 >files).
 >Although the tool is working well, it's throwing up a lot of licences 
that
 >are used by just one or two files, and which are only very subtly 
different
 >from licences in use elsewhere in boost (by different I mean that they 
use
 >different words, not just formatting, or punctuation).  My guess is that
 >most of these are accidental changes, and if that is the case then it 
would
 >make things a whole lot easier if they could be changed to match other
 >existing boost licences - from a lawyers point of view,  why should a
 >commercial body wanting to use Boost have to review 50 almost but not 
quite
 >identical licences, when just two or three variants would do?
 >
 >Thoughts, comments?

A single standard Boost licence is really the best solution for most 
libraries, IMO.

A draft should be ready in a few days.

--Beman