Re: [Boost-users] Boost Software License implications for derivativeworks

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Boost Software License implications for derivativeworks
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-06 11:30:37

> The Boost Software License (BSL) requires derivative works to include the 
> text of the Boost License itself.
>
> I am considering the use of the Boost preprocessor library (only) to 
> implment certain parts of Castor <http://www.mpprogramming.com/cpp> (an 
> open source C++ library) which is already covered under the MIT license.
>
> My real concern is, by including the BSL text in Castor, I dont want it to 
> look as if Castor is covered by BSL when it is actually covered by MIT 
> license.
>
> As Boost::pp would be used internally it would be shipped as part of the 
> library.
>
> Would it suffice if boost::pp headers were simply bundled as-is, along 
> with the licensing text that appears at the top each header ? That way it 
> would appear as if only those headers are covered by BSL and the rest of 
> Castor is covered by MIT.

The BSL is intended to be non-viral, your code can appear under any terms 
you want regardless of the fact that it uses Boost.  The only requirement is 
that the BSL remains on the Boost headers, or on code directly derived from 
them (by cut and paste for example).

HTH, John.