Re: [Boost-users] Ownership of Boost IP?

From: Nat Goodspeed (ngoodspeed_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-04 09:42:32

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-users-
> bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Paul Giaccone
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:38 AM
> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Ownership of Boost IP?
> 
> Nat Goodspeed wrote:
> > I suppose the next round would involve my arguing that it would take
me
> > many months to implement even part of the functionality in question
> >
> The answer to that would be to contact the Boost developers for all
the
> libraries you intend to or might use, and ask them how long it took
them
> to code up their respective libraries. 

[Nat] I'm hoping to avoid any approach that would add per-Boost-library
overhead. Having to decide in advance the set of libraries I intend to
use - and later facing additional internal battles to get permission to
use one more -- would be discouraging.

But I take your point: you're talking about an example set, not
literally suggesting that I repeat the process every time I desire to
incorporate another new Boost library.

> Add it all up and present that
> figure to your boss, pointing out that these people were at least as
> competent as you or any other programmer he might care to employ. Does
> he *really* want to wait a year or two for the code you are writing
for
> him?

[Nat] Certainly he wouldn't want that. I guess I wasn't thinking clearly
last night. The real problem is that nobody -- not me, not my boss, not
the lawyers -- wants me to (attempt to) reimplement any Boost library.
If we can't use Boost, then we must resort to the ugly hand-coded
mechanisms that C++ programmers used before Boost emerged. No smart
pointers? Delete the !@#? pointers yourself! No bind()? No
boost::function? Quit griping and use the STL adapters!

Can I make a case that the small incremental costs in coding time and
reliability would add up to a bigger hit than the hypothetical risk of
lawsuit? It seems doubtful, since all the factors involved in such an
argument are sheer guesswork -- and every party will believe their own
guesses rather than their opponents'.

My boss might even be sympathetic. But my boss isn't the real problem
here.

> You might also want to ask your boss whether he is concerned that
> Microsoft (or whoever wrote your compiler) might sue for use of their
> version of C++, or whether he thinks Bjarne Stroustrup might be
sending
> you a writ... Of course, that would just be ridiculous, wouldn't it?
;)

[Nat] Microsoft it is. I think I heard that Microsoft's licenses
(purport to) protect you, the user of their products, from this kind of
liability. That may be what raised this whole issue in our legal dept.
in the first place.