This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
| Other format: | [Raw text] | |
Recently the question of how to deal with boost code has come up. In general, boost code is licensed via the Boost Software License, which is GPL compatible. So, using it is possible. For reference, this was discussed in regards to tr1::shared_ptr, etc. See this thread: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2005-02/msg00143.html After discussions with FSF legal, the following guidelines are suggested: 1) Use or derive from the boost code, keep the BSL license, add GPL + exception (C) FSF to changed work. 2) Use or derive from the boost code, get permission and assignments from all the authors, and license under GPL + exception (C) FSF. After auditing the current state of libstdc++, I see two areas of boost influence: concept_checking and the tr1::shared_ptr bits. For the concept checking, the file in question is (or was, at the time of derivation) not actually licensed with the BSL. However, Phil did the right thing anyway and kept the original license, and did #2 above. For the recent tr1::shared_ptr bits, we need to do the same. The following patch implements this, along with the naming conventions and forwarding headers established by boost_concept_check.h, which, IMHO I think are wise. I hope this clarifies things for all concerned. Jonathan? tested x86/linux -benjamin
Attachment:
p.20050323-1.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |