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: Marshall Clow (mclow.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-09-05 17:38:55

On Sep 5, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Jens Müller <blog_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Am 04.09.2012 18:16, schrieb Paul A. Bristow:
>> 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.
> 
> Do you have formal escrow procedures for that?
> 
> To proof mere existence in a legally sustainable way, it would be sufficient to apply cryptographically signed timestamps.
> 
> German law provides for "qualified timestamps" (§ 9 Signaturgesetz). I think they are based on European directives. What I don't know is whether there are similar concepts in other important jurisdictions such as the US.

No, Boost does not.
We've got svn history (and before that, cvs), and a whole slew of mailing list archives.

-- Marshall

Marshall Clow     Idio Software   <mailto:mclow.lists_at_[hidden]>

A.D. 1517: Martin Luther nails his 95 Theses to the church door and is promptly moderated down to (-1, Flamebait).
        -- Yu Suzuki