From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-01-24 03:59:20
On 1/23/2020 9:55 PM, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 4:57 PM Edward Diener via Boost <
> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 1/23/2020 2:29 PM, John Maddock via Boost wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2020 19:19, Rene Rivera via Boost wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:13 PM Edward Diener via Boost <
>>>> boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>> If some compiler vendor takes a version of Boost and makes changes to
>>>>> that version of Boost to suit the particular compiler, while
>>>>> distributing that version with full source code as an optional part of
>>>>> some release of that compiler, does this mean that the code is now
>>>>> proprietary for that compiler vendor ? Or does the code still remain
>>>>> open source so that a programmer can use the changes made to update his
>>>>> own version of a Boost release or provide PRs to some later release of
>>>>> Boost based on the code in the compiler vendor's release ?
>>>> Depends entirely on what license they made the changes available as.
>>> Yup, if they don't copyright the changes, then it's still all BSL, but
>>> they are allowed to make their changes proprietary.
>>> If you're thinking of moving changes upstream into Boost, then I suggest
>>> you just drop them a line and see how they feel about that.
>> Where would I be expected to find some indication whether they have made
>> their changes proprietary ? Is it required to be in each source file, or
>> is it required to be in some other place related to the Boost
>> distribution they supply, and if so where ?
>> I have been in contact with one of their representatives, so I will ask
>> him point blank about it, but I did want to know in advance if there was
>> any requirement they specify their copyright changes in some particular
>> place related to their distribution of the source code.
> If they made changes they want to claim copyright on they would have needed
> to add their copyright statement to each source file they made significant
> changes to. But only if they are existing source files. For new files it
> can by anywhere they want (including nowhere). Note that if they did make
> changes and the copyright is no clear as a user I would avoid using the
> entirety of their included Boost distribution. As there would be no way to
> know the provenance of their changes and corresponding usage rights.
I can assert that there is no new copyright in any of the source files
to which changes have been made to support the particular compiler
vendor, nor has the copyright that was previously in the source files
changed at all. I also do not see any new files in the distribution that
was not there before. Of course I can still ask them if they consider
their distribution proprietary. If they answer 'yes' I suppose I can
then point out to them that they have not changed the copyright for the
source files they modified at all.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk