Subject: Re: [boost] Boost licensing information
From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-04-13 09:56:45
>> The BSL is compatible with the GPL, so I find it very hard to believe
>> that Apache 2.0 is incompatible.
>> Source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html
> I believe it is more correct to say Apache 2.0 does not meet Boost
> requirements to the license in that it is more restrictive than the
> BSL. In particular, BSL has no requirements similar to those in Apache
> 2.0  Section 4 item b.
> Also, unlike BSL, Apache 2.0 is not compatible with GPLv2, only GPLv3,
> which is not as popular.
> The boilerplate comment that is recommended to be used to apply the
> license, and the license itself, are significantly longer than those
> of BSL. I'll remind that this thread has started from someone having
> difficulty reading and understanding the BSL, and Apache 2.0 is not
> likely to improve on that.
> : https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Irrespective of the merits of the various licences, I would remind
everyone that it took us the better part of 2 years last time we changed
licences... and Boost has grown immeasurably larger since then. I am
emphatically not going to take on that task again, if someone else wants
to volunteer, I can only wish them good luck - they will most certainly
--- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk