Re: [boost] Microsoft vs The Boost License

Subject: Re: [boost] Microsoft vs The Boost License
From: Jens Weller (JensWeller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-08-05 15:53:37

Hello Phil,

> Gesendet: Samstag, 05. August 2017 um 16:04 Uhr
> Von: "Phil Bouchard via Boost" <boost_at_[hidden]>
> An: boost_at_[hidden]
> Cc: "Phil Bouchard" <philippeb8_at_[hidden]>
> Betreff: [boost] Microsoft vs The Boost License
>
> Hi,
> 
> Just to put everybody in context:
> 
> 
> 1) Microsoft had invested into Corel so that they get rid of Corel Linux 
> back in 2000 when I was working there:
> https://www.forbes.com/2000/10/03/1003corel.html
> 
> 
> 2) Microsoft once again copied my Fornux PowerCalc after I had presented 
> it to them using some web interface:
> http://www.fornux.com/
> 
> With their Microsoft PowerToys:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_PowerToys#Included_applications

So this is personal?

> 3) And now here I am with Microsoft trying to copy the idea behind 
> root_ptr's node_proxy:
> https://github.com/philippeb8/root_ptr
> 
> With their "deferred_ptr heap":
> https://github.com/hsutter/gcpp
> 
> 
> So for some reason I do not trust Microsoft. And I was wondering if the 
> Boost license protects us from an idea behind a library we wrote. 
> Otherwise this makes the Boost license not very useful.

You should have some more evidence, that there is a relation between Herbs gcpp, and your root_ptr.

Btw. Herb presented this last year in his CppCon keynote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfmTagWcqoE

So thats why its fairly well known in the community.

cheers,

Jens Weller