Boost logo

Boost Users :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-04-01 14:32:39

"Jim.Hyslop" <Jim.Hyslop_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> It seems to me that we can't ask
>> our volunteer lawyers to draw up a list of answers to all the possible
>> licensing questions along these lines, nor can we reasonably make them
>> available as an on-demand resource for answering boost users' legal
>> questions.
> No, but I think that the interaction between the LGPL or GPL and the Boost
> License is probably going to be a very frequently encountered scenario.
> Basically, what it boils down to is: what is the compatibility between LGPL
> or GPL, and the Boost license?

There are lots of different possible interactions, depending on what
code (Boost or [L]GPL) they want to ship as source vs. compiled... and
who knows what other issues become relevant.

> Can we draw up a list of the most common free-software licenses, say
> the top three, and ask the volunteer lawyers to determine whether
> Boost is compatible with each of the three? I don't mean to
> determine the various combinations and permutations, e.g. Boost and
> GPL and Mozilla Artistic, but the simple ones: Boost and "x", Boost
> and "y", etc.

We could try, but as I've said there are quite a few scenarios. If
you can identify a specific list of the important ones, with all the
important details (and I'm not even sure what they are) filled in, we
can try to get the lawyers to comment on them.

> Until and unless such a comparison is done, though, I would echo
> your advice about seeking a competent legal opinion.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at