From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-18 11:54:15
Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
> At 05:43 PM 9/17/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
> >> Changes to the license must be very rare and carefully considered. It
> >> is really like a language standard - stability is necessary to get
> >> developers on board.
> >I still question the legality of licensing by reference to text which
> >may change dynamically. And it may have a chilling effect. It's not
> >just the authors who might be nervous, but the users as well. If you
> >were a corporate lawyer, would *you* OK the use of source code whose
> >license might change at any time without notice? I believe users must
> >be allowed to continue to use the code under the *original* licensing
> >terms they agreed to.
> The licensed can't change dynamically. That's a
> misunderstanding. Once a release is made, the license for that
> release is frozen for all time. That's already mentioned in the FAQ.
> Devin Smith commented "Note that Boost will not be able to
> retroactively change the terms applicable to a licensee who has
> received code under the terms of an older version of a license
I talked to Devin a few minutes ago and he also indicated that Boost
can't change the license on any files without permission from the
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk