Re: [boost] Transfer of Maintenance Rights

Subject: Re: [boost] Transfer of Maintenance Rights
From: Phil Endecott (spam_from_boost_dev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-25 13:34:00

Stewart, Robert wrote:
> Phil Endecott wrote:
>> Stewart, Robert wrote:
>> > By submitting a library to Boost, you agree to put the
>> > library and its
>> > documentation under a Boost-compatible license, if it is accepted.
>>
>> I just wanted
>> to point out that submissions really ought to be under the Boost
>> license (and I guess not just 'a Boost-compatible license') when they
>
> I'm not sure it is required that they use the Boost License, though perhaps 
> we could phrase that as, "By submitting a library to Boost, you agree to 
> put the library and its documentation under the Boost License, at least, 
> if it is accepted."
>
>> are submitted, not when they are accepted.  As far as I
>> recall this has been what has happened in the past.
>
> I wasn't sure I could say that.  What is an author to do if their library 
> is rejected and they want to put it under a different license later?  Can 
> they really rescind the freedom of the Boost License and replace it with 
> another?  My guess is no.

They can publish new versions under a different license, or under 
multiple licenses, and this doesn't retroactively change the terms of 
their boost-candidate submission.

We don't want to be in a position where a negative review result means 
that existing users of a candidate library have to stop using it.  Or 
that the review manager feels pressured into accepting a borderline 
library because rejecting it would mean it could no longer be used by a 
minority of reviewers who did like it.

Personally, "my lawyer" wouldn't want me to even look at code (e.g. for 
review) if it didn't already have a clear and liberal license.

Phil.