From: Darren Cook (darren_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-17 07:55:49
>>Yes, I can probably do that; I seem to remember it was BSD-like but
>>with some slight difference that I didn't fully understand.
> I'd say it's much more MIT-like, but that's for you to suss out.
Yes, I think you're right.
How about these additions to the FAQ:
Q. How is it different from the MIT or BSD license?
Same in principle, except the Boost license adds the "machine-executable
object code generated by a source language processor" clause. See above for
why. In addition there is no no-endorsement clause as found in the BSD
license (see http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php).
Q. How is it different from the GPL?
The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for commercial or
non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release your source code.
The GPL is also much longer.
Did I get that right and are there any other important differences?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk