Re: Compliance with Boost copyright and license guidelines

From: pbristow_at_[hidden]
Date: 2019-08-22 07:54:12

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost <boost-bounces_at_[hidden]> On Behalf Of degski via Boost
> Sent: 22 August 2019 04:53
> To: boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> Cc: degski <degski_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [boost] Compliance with Boost copyright and license guidelines
> 
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 at 17:22, Paul A Bristow via Boost < boost_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> 
> > PS I'm willing to accept that Python is a low bar (though it is yet
> > another widget to install for Microsoftys).  But it's got to work 😉
> >
> 
> The python installation process is at least a lot easier than to install Boost, and it
> [the installer] does what we dummies softies are used to:

I was implying that the *son-of-inspect* Python program has got to work.

The current inspect has worked for nearly two decades and still does.

And John Maddock has just made the CI process run it routinely, so people can see how bad their library is much more easily.

With Multiprecision and Math libraries, it is just the tedious process of checking all the inspect reports and deciding what to do about them.

Lots of errant, tax, max/min macro issues, missing licences (many live generated files that we could manage without licences, though a tip to people writing C++ or other code to generate C++ code, it is easy at the writing stage to code to write the license and copyright at the head of the generated file (but a hassle and possibly troublesome to do it later, especially for some other poor sucker 😉)

Lots of files that don't need license and copyright can have boost-no-inspect written into them, or added, or whole folders made no-inspect.  It just needs some work.

The big job is sorting out all the libraries, IMO.

Paul

Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal, Cumbria 
LA8 8AB           UK