Re: [boost] [mp_int] new release

Subject: Re: [boost] [mp_int] new release
From: Kevin Sopp (baraclese_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-10-07 07:45:03

Hi Paul,

> This looks very useful but I note that
>
> http://www.boost.org/development/requirements.html#License
>
> and current Boost practice is that all the files include the Boost license text.
> (This should include the .qbk as well - as a Quickbook comment.  Tedious but you can paste).

I know about that, and I think this license requirement wasn't written
with a public domain library in mind. I believe it is also possible to
add a noinspect comment in the file to silence the inspection script.

> I don't see that your 'in the public domain' (rather ill-defined?) is any different from the Boost license text, so this is a mainly
> cosmetic matter.  For some or all the source code, you could also include Tom St. Denis in the copyright too?

Public Domain specifically means that there is no copyright on the
code. I could create a dual release with the Boost license for Boost
and put up the public domain version somewhere else but that is not
what I would like to do.