Subject: Re: [boost] [simd] Hardware support
From: Michael Caisse (mcaisse-lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-04-10 05:31:03
On 4/9/17 09:08, Robert Ramey via Boost wrote:
> So I guess it's more correct to say that
> a) if a library has Boost license, fine it can be reviewed.
> b) if a library has a Boost Compatible license, it can also be reviewed.
> But it's not clear to me who determines this. I guess this would be the
> review wizard who decides to add (or not add) a library to the review
Legal guidance would need to be provided by the Software Freedom
Conservancy's (of which Boost belongs) legal counsel.
> There is one issue still pending. Suppose one submits a library with a
> compatible license which incorporates code which from another source in
> such a way that the right to use the incorporated code is in question.
> I'm not really sure, but it seems that Mathias has (among other things)
> raised this as an issue. I would guess that places the onus on Joel to
> explain why he feels that this is not a problem in this case and finally
> the review wizard will have to consider the point in his decision to
> accept the request to place the library in the review queue.
> I'm aware that decisions such of this can never be resolved
> definitively. It's a feature of the legal system that the more time is
> expended, the more it serves the system rather then the rest of us.
> Basically they get paid to bikeshed. That's why we like to stay away
> from it.
> But, I'm hopeful that we can get legitimate concerns addressed one way
> or another in an expedient way so we can all move forward.
I'll be contacting the Conservancy's counsel to help navigate this. I'm
primarily concerned as member of the steering committee and secondarily
concerned as the review manager.
-- Michael Caisse Ciere Consulting ciere.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk