Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-18 11:02:21

"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 20:51:05 -0400, David Abrahams wrote
>> > So if we wanted to filter down the report I suggest we throw out all the
>> > licensing issues...
>> I respectfully disagree. Improving our licensing consistency is an
>> important goal for Boost, and leaving off licenses/copyrights is a
>> real barrier to adoption. Let's not allow it to get worse, at least.
> I don't disagree with improving things, but we need an organized effort to
> modify that many files that isn't right before the release. For example,
> Date-time has be bunch of documentation files that don't have license info
> directly embedded. However, I don't think there can be any confusion since the
> license is linked from the first page of the docs and is in every source file.
> I don't feel that adding a license reference in every doc file is a valueable
> use of my time right now.
> So, let me clarify that I was thinking of these auxilary files like Jamfiles
> and documentation files that I consider less important. I think that all
> source files need a copyright and license reference.

What I would like to ensure is that the number of files without
license or copyright is no greater than it was at the last release.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at