Re: [Boost-users] Applying Boost license to non boost projects

From: e r (erwann.rogard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-21 22:01:17

Robert Marion wrote:
> You may wish to consider applying the liberal BSD (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php) or MIT (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php) licenses.  These are both in widespread use for open source, and impose no restrictions, aside from attribution, on the user.
> 
> Putting the license text at the top of all headers is not strictly necessary, but not a bad idea. 
>  
> 
> Robert Marion
> 
> http://www.palamida.com
> 
> 
>> I am interested in adopting the Boost Software license for an open
>  source C++ 
>> library (Castor:  http://www.mpprogramming.com/2.html) 
>>
>>  [ snip ]
>> - Does this same guideline apply to non boost projects ?  The need for
>  stating 
>> Boost.org there might confuse some users of non boost prj to think that
>  the 
>> library is supplied by Boost.
>> - Do all header files in my prj (which is a pure header library) need
>  to 
>> include this text at the top/somewhere in order to adopt the license.
>>
>> -Roshan

hi,

i have written some primitives to be used with Boost.Accumulators, and
i'm considering to make them available. these files are mostly *.hpp and
depend on boost headers. under what license is it preferable that I
distribute them under?

thanks,

e.