Re: [boost] boost thread license and copyright

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-13 08:18:34

David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Anthony Williams <anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>>   thread (117)
>>
>> I've added boostinspect:nolicense to most of these files, where they are
>> covered by an old license from William Kempf.
>
> Is that really a good idea?  These should be flagged as not having the
> Boost license until we get them replaced.  Isn't that the whole point
> of the report?

I understand things differently. I thought the point of the report was to flag
files that hadn't been thought about. Since these files aren't under the BSL,
and can't be made to be, the boostinspect::nolicense was added precisely to
address this issue, so files like these didn't clutter the report.

If that's not the intention, I can revert the changes.

>> The remaining files have no license and copyright info. I have not
>> touched these, as I am unclear as to what should happen.
>>
>> Some of them have current boost contributors listed as the author in
>> the CVS log, but others were first created by William Kempf.
>
> If the only edits were made by people who are reachable, you can get
> their permission to change the license.  Or, if they're already listed
> in more/blanket-permission.txt, you don't need to ask.

OK, I'll check those in more detail.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Williams
Software Developer
Just Software Solutions Ltd
http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk