Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries

Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-25 06:03:12

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Daniel James
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 8:17 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] 5 Observations - My experience with the boost libraries
> 
> > Of course this would mean that whatever "rights" once a library is submitted to Boost
> > ( I am not a legal expert ) which the author of a Boost library retains can
> > be removed if the author does not support the library any longer, and that
> > this is part of Boost policy.
> 
> The boost license is pretty clear. There's no need to remove any
> rights, ownership isn't as formal as you think. It's mostly based on
> respect and convention.

IANAL ;-)

But I am clear that the legal status of Boost, a worldwide organisation, is extremely ill defined.

So nobody has any effective 'rights' except perhaps those of copyright law (which varies widely).

What the license means is the nobody else has the right to *stop* anyone else doing anything with the code. 

They can sell it, but they can't stop anyone else selling it, or using it.  (Unless they manage to patent it - probably
tricky).

Boost runs almost entirely based on respect and convention, so we should avoid going all 'lawyerish' :-)

If the maintainer appears missing (on holiday even), I'd favour quicker patching of bugs, after some discussion seeking
agreement - or veto.

I think this works already, but slowly, perhaps we need to be a little less concerned for authors 'rights'.

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal, UK   LA8 8AB
[phone], mobile [phone]
pbristow_at_[hidden]