Re: [Boost-users] Why is there so much co-dependency in Boost? Is there anything to be done about it?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Why is there so much co-dependency in Boost? Is there anything to be done about it?
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-04 12:16:37

From: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of
Jeffrey Lee Hellrung, Jr.
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 10:58 PM
To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Why is there so much co-dependency in Boost? Is there anything to be done
about it?

> On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM, steve_at_[hidden] <steve_at_[hidden]> wrote:
Greetings,
> As a veteran C++ programmer, I've been an admirer of the Boost library for many years.  I've >
used it at a number of companies I've worked for, especially the SmartPtr library.
> Right now I'm working for a company that worries a lot about negative exposure to Open
 > Source software issues such as questions that might arise about authorship, copyright or > > even
patent issues.  The company does allow the use of Open Source software, but it requires >that each
piece of code that is brought in first be justified and vetted.  Unfortunately, I'm >finding this to
be a nearly impossible task when I look at the amount of code that must be >compiled to use the
Boost modules I'm interested in.

I don't think that you can avoid using all-of-Boost or none-of-Boost.  There are very good reasons
for the co-dependency. Concentrate your arguments on the massive benefits you are getting?

Boost has put a lot of effort into making sure that all files (including documentation and graphics)
contain an authors' copyright claim notice (and that it is a correct claim - and have rejected items
for which this was not possible).
(There is a 'sinners list'  at http://boost.cowic.de/rc/inspect-trunk.html - so you can check the
few libraries and files that do not conform.  Don't panic at the number of items missing - few are
actual C++ code - most are in documentation and examples).

Although it is unlikely that any code contains patentable concepts, it is not possible to be sure
until this is tested in the courts.  Boost would not knowingly provide software that is patented
without marking it as such clearly.

Because Boost is a leader in software development, that a library is accepted for Boost makes it
very much less likely that it is already patented, and the code being placed in the public domain
may provide evidence of 'prior art' to thwart future attempts to obtain a patent.

Finally, there are very many companies using Boost and none, to my knowledge, have reported getting
into trouble so far.

You will need to work to get a blanket acceptance of the all Boost libraries?

HTH

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow,
Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal LA8 8AB  UK
[phone]  07714330204
pbristow_at_[hidden]