From: Jonathan Brandmeyer (jbrandmeyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-10 14:35:09
John Maddock's prodding with regard to copyright notices in Boost's
sources got me thinking about the copyright notices in its
Currently, some docs have a copyright notice using the Boost Software
License, some have a permissive license other than the BSL, and some
just say "Copyright (c) DATE AUTHOR". I haven't done a detailed survey;
that observation is just based on a random browsing of the Boost docs.
I generally believe in using the same copyright license for the
documentation as the one used for the software, at least in the context
of Free/Open Source Software. That may or may not be entirely
appropriate considering the BSL's particular language concerning
Has this issue been raised in the past? Was there a consensus? If not,
what do you think about it, now?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk