Subject: Re: [boost] License question
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-13 08:27:02
On 13/10/10 13:23, David Bellot wrote:
> Hi guys,
> I'm working on a new library for some specific A.I and machine learning
> problems and I will release it as a Free Software of course.
> However, I wonder if you guys can enlighten me regarding license.
> This library will be template-based for some parts and compiled for other
> parts. I don't want to restrict users in what they're doing with the
> library, I mean they can use it for open-source or closed-source products.
> However, I want to decently protect my work and because it's template-based
> and can be used in commercial products, I don't want someone to do
> closed-source fork of it and all those kind of things...
> I selected to candidates: Boost and LGPL.
> So question:
> - do I have to use a Boost license or a LGPL license ?
> - and why not using GPL directly or is it too restrictive ?
Otherwise, there is the GPL license with the linking exception, as used
It is in spirit similar to LGPL, except it doesn't require dynamic
linking and works well with C++ templates.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk