Re: [boost] Any libraries now not under the Boost Software License?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-28 11:04:44

on Mon May 28 2007, Michael Stevens <list-boost-AT-michael-stevens.de> wrote:

> On Sunday 27 May 2007 11:36, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> David Abrahams wrote:

>> > In that case I vote for ripping ublas out of Boost unless and until
>> > the authors fix it.  This is crazy; people have had long enough.
>
> crazy ;-)
>
>> Interesting. Reading http://boost.org/more/lib_guide.htm#License I see
>> that BSL is the recommended, but not required license. Above, you propose
>> to rip out a part of Boost because it's not BSL. Can you please point me to
>>
>> - A document that say BSL is an absolute requirement
>> - A mailing list announcement that BSL is now an absolute requirement
>>
>> I've no comment if such change is good or not, but I'm worried about such
>> global decision being made silently.
>
> Indeed.

Well, it's not being made silently; we're discussing it now.  Nothing
like a radical proposal for getting the issues out into the open, is
there? ;-)

> With regard to uBLAS I think there is little chance of a license
> change.
>
> Joerg was contactable up to last year by phone. Email however landed
> in the bit bucket. He was always very non committal as to a change
> to a BGL license.  I assume a change would require Mathias'
> agreement. I not sure who Mathias is or if Joerg was still in
> contact with him. Basically the orignal authors do not seem to be
> interested in a license change.
>
> We would have to accept that if uBLAS's license becomes unacceptable
> to the Boost community then uBLAS would have to move. The change to
> BSL has been around for a long time after all and the BSL is a good
> thing.
>
> Maybe there would be a gentler solution then Dave's suggested
> 'ripping out'. 

I would love that.  

> I think a single license for all of Boost is very
> helpful to users.  So the change would have to make the license
> status very clear. Some kind of 'historical', 'aberrant license'
> status maybe?

Personally, I don't think it makes much sense.  It looks like in the
very near future this library will be the one and only piece of Boost
that is not under BSL.  I think having one single special case hurts
Boost way more than it helps.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com