Re: [boost] McAfee is using Boost

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-06-23 08:55:54

Maciej Sobczak <prog_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>
>> 3. I'd just say "go ahead," but I know how these things work in
>>    companies.  The question to the PR department triggers a discussion
>>    with the legal department and they both decide it would be safer
>>    for the company if their use of open source software were not
>>    publicized.
>
> Which questions the whole idea of "Who's using Boost".
>
> Your goal should be to provide a testimonies of those who are *proud* 
> users of Boost - only then you can publish the list and call it "Boost 
> success stories".

> If you want to publish the info even *knowing* that this might not
> be intended from the point of view of any not-so-proud user, then
> your list stops to be a list of "success stories" anymore and
> becomes a nitpick list, which can be titled "Boost shame stories".
>
> Sorry, but I think you should slow down and reflect.

I spent some time thinking about your points.  I think the whole
question of pride or shame is a red herring.  If PR and
legal get together and decide that they don't want it widely known
that the company is relying on open-source software, it means nothing
about whether the company as a whole is proud of their use.  In the
worst case, just going through this authorization process causes the
company to stop using open source altogether, because while they
aren't required to reproduce the BSL in their literature, that isn't
true of some other licenses.

All that said, anyone with serious reservations about this is welcome
to go through the approval process with any company they like.  If you
receive a negative response and the respondent is aware of the other
publicly available information I would be happy to have the entry
pulled from the list.  We have enough people directly reporting their
use of Boost that it won't matter very much.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com