Re: [boost] [SoC] License question

From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-20 12:17:27

Ames Andreas wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] 
>> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Jeff Garland
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 3:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: [boost] [SoC] License question
>>
>> Hugh Wimberly wrote:
>>> general written in C and are all open-source. Since they're 
>> written in C, I
>>> couldn't directly use code anyway, but I'm a little worried 
>> about how much I
>>> can use them as a reference since most of them are licensed 
>> under the GPL,
>>> and Boost has an incredibly open license that isn't 
>> compatible with the GPL.
> 
> IANAL either, but according to
>  http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#SoftwareLicenses 
> the latter statement, the one about GPL-compatibility, isn't
> accurate.

That listing has a different view. It tells whether code that has 
originally been released under a non-GPL license can be relicensed under 
GPL (this is termed "combining", but since GPL is viral, the combined 
work has to licensed under GPL, including the formely non-GPL parts). 
Boost is a very free license, so this is possible.

However, it is not possible to relicense GPLed code under BSL (unless 
you're the copyright holder). The GPL is a lot less free than the Boost 
license. This is the what Hugh was talking about.

IANAL-ly yours,
m
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com