From: Jaakko Jarvi (jajarvi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-18 20:47:41
> I looked at your code. Portability seems fine. (I'm assuming there are no
> compilers supporting SFINAE but not partial specialization?)
> The license seems far more in-depth than most other Boost licenses. For such
> a simple library, might this be misguided? (That is, can it be provided
> under a simpler license?)
That's a standard open source license of our employer.
The license will change to standard Boost license soon
(some procdures that our employer obligates need to be done first).
> Aside from questions over the license, I think this should be accepted into
> Boost (IMO without a formal review).
It's easy to agree with this :)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk