Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Ratio
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-05 12:20:13

Hi Paul,
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul A. Bristow" <pbristow_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Ratio

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
>> On Behalf Of Anthony Williams
>> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 11:01 PM
>> To: boost_at_[hidden]
>> Cc: boost-announce_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: [boost] [Review] Formal Review: Boost.Ratio
>> Vicente has an extensive suite of tests licensed under the LLVM license.
> He has
>> posted a message on the Boost Developers mailing list regarding the
> license
>> requirements for tests (See
>>, and is
> awaiting
>> the outcome of that discussion before making the tests available.
> If we decide we can't include the LLVM licensed tests,
> I think a small subset of tests will suffice - since we have the knowledge
> that it has been tested
> using non-Boost licensable test code. Anyone who really cares about more
> tests can get them
> and use them if their legal advisers permit.
> (I find the idea that seeing the LLVM code would make a work 'derivative'
> more than a bit far-fetched).

>From the comments on the thread I can conclude that Boosters don't like to see files with LLVM license even if they are only for tests. If the library is accepted I will write a complete test suite under the BSL. The reason is that even if the library has been tested in some compilers and platforms I will need this complete test suite to ensure the library works correctly with other compiler and platforms. As I have no access to all these platforms, the single and simple way I see is to add them on Boost. In addition, the user will be able to check the library works as expected on its own environement without the need to down load another package.
>> - What is your evaluation of the documentation?
> OK, but needs proof reading by a non-author. Too many typos!

Paul, it would be great if you can do it if the library is accepted. Just, let me know.

>> - Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
> Yes.
> Paul

Thanks a lot,

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at