RE: [boost] Re: License : Graph library incompatw/Boost (was incompatw/GPL)

From: Jon Kalb (jonkalb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-07 14:32:32

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of David Abrahams
> Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 4:15 AM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: Andrew Lumsdaine; Lie-Quan Lee; Jeremy Siek
> Subject: [boost] Re: License Conversion Update: Graph library 
> incompatw/GPL

> Maybe this is all a distraction.  I think it may be a much 
> bigger problem that the graph library's license, IIUC, seems 
> to be incompatible with the Boost license requirements.  
> Isn't anyone a little alarmed about that?
> 
> I guess if there's a chance we can relicense it under the 
> Boost license, that'd solve things, but I'm not sure it's 
> possible.  Can any of the copyright holders comment?

Yes I'm alarmed about that.

I looked at the graph library docs on the web site and they don't say
anything at all about copyright or license (that I could find).

I think we are (unintentionally) misleading people. People have a right
to assume that any library that we have accepted has met the submission
requirements which include the license requirements from
http://boost.org/more/lib_guide.htm#License. We simply can't include a
library that doesn't meet these requirements.

I think we need to pull the graph library from the current release and
put a note on the website explaining the situation until we get it
resolved. I realize that this is a pretty drastic move, but I feel this
situation calls Boost's integrity into question and that calls for swift
and decisive action.

How was this not caught during the review?

-- 
Jon Kalb