RE: [jamboost] A few nits

From: bjorn.karlsson_at_[hidden]
Date: 2003-02-05 05:08:43

> From: Beman Dawes [mailto:bdawes_at_[hidden]]

> Create a link to it in some HTML file. If it is a file that 
> isn't being 
> linked to because it isn't part of an official release yet, 
> try adding a 
> link to it from itself to suppress the error message.

These are the files in question:
* tools/build/boost_build_v2.html: broken link: features_properties,
broken link: link_compatibility, broken link: target_reference, unlinked
file
* tools/build/test/test_system.html: unlinked file

> The inspect program just scans for "copyright" or 
> "Copyright", so you can 
> suppress errors by adding a comment like: // Not copyright

I've added the "default" copyright for consistency.

> >... But, files in examples-v2/qt and example-v2/qt-ui should
> >not be altered. Have no idea about their copyrights.
> 
> For files like that, we need to figure out who the copyright 
> owner is, and 
> get permission to use them.

The files are:
* tools/build/examples-v2/qt/lcdrange.cpp: missing copyright
* tools/build/examples-v2/qt/lcdrange.h: missing copyright
* tools/build/examples-v2/qt/main.cpp: missing copyright

> I guess there are cases (helloworld.cpp might be an example) 
> where a file 
> carries no copyright, but we feel that's OK. A comment should 
> be added 
> saying so, and why. Perhaps:
> 
> // Not copyright because this program is in the public domain

I still think it's even better if we use the default copyright. For example,
when I ran some Boost libraries through our legal department, I had to
include every copyright statement (and I know that "not copyrighted" would
be considered a most intriguing copyright by these people...) - with one
default that is widely used, the workload of collecting the different
versions is reduced. 

Anyway, Boost.Build, as of this morning, only gives the above warnings (6
files), which is very nice indeed! Special thanks to Volodya for the quick
response!

Bjorn