Hi. I'm thinking of starting an open source project, and I'm seriously considering using Boost. I've read many messages regarding the practical aspects of using boost with other projects (particularly open source). However, I have found nothing useful regarding the legal aspect of using Boost for an open source project. As I'm considering licensing my project under the GPL, I'm concerned about the GPL "friendlyness" towards Boost. Besides the technical aspect of it, what is the best way to structure the project, to license the project, etc. in order to satisfy GPL and Boost licenses? Any help would be much appreciated. Best regards, Ezequiel "This communication is intended solely for the addressee and is confidential and not for third party unauthorised distribution."
Boost license and Open SourceHi Ezequiel, I am in a similar situation and although I'm not an IP lawyer (I just pay them a lot of money), my understanding is as follows: The Boost license will not allow you to redistribute the Boost source as part of your project and re-assign its license terms. Conceptually, think of Boost as an extension to the standard library and designate it in your documentation as a dependency of your project that must be independently obtained, installed, and configured as part of the process of setting up a build environment compatible with your project. You are then free to distribute your source (sans Boost source) under whatever license you see fit. - Regards Chris
The Boost license will not allow you to redistribute the Boost source as part of your project and re-assign its license terms. Conceptually, think of Boost as an extension to the standard library and designate it in your documentation as a dependency of your project that must be independently obtained, installed, and configured as part of the process of setting up a build environment compatible with your project. You are then free to distribute your source (sans Boost source) under whatever license you see fit.
You can certainly redistribute all or part of Boost with your project, but you must make it clear what it's licence terms are separately from those of your code. John.
On 4/29/04 9:07 AM, "Christopher D. Russell" <cdr@encapsule.com> wrote:
Boost license and Open SourceHi Ezequiel, I am in a similar situation and although I'm not an IP lawyer (I just pay them a lot of money), my understanding is as follows:
The Boost license will not allow you to redistribute the Boost source as part of your project and re-assign its license terms. Conceptually, think of Boost as an extension to the standard library and designate it in your documentation as a dependency of your project that must be independently obtained, installed, and configured as part of the process of setting up a build environment compatible with your project. You are then free to distribute your source (sans Boost source) under whatever license you see fit.
You can also distribute the Boost source with your source. You just can't change the license for that part of your distribution. There might be some potential for user confusion, but this might be avoided by documenting clearly which part of your distribution is covered by the Boost license and which is covered by your other Open Source license(s). I think one of the advantages of including the Boost sources with your distribution is that you can avoid the problem of having your source work with a particular release of Boost, but your users may download a more recent release with which you many not be completely compatible. -- Jon Kalb Kalb@LibertySoft.com
participants (4)
-
Christopher D. Russell -
eze.boost.org.users＠secureit.mailshell.com -
John Maddock -
Jon Kalb