On Nov 7, 2004, at 6:46 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
At 05:42 PM 11/7/2004, Jared McIntyre wrote:
I'm guessing from reading through the 1.32 tarball docs that the this release will still have some libraries that are not under the Boost 1 license. Is this the case?
Yes, but John Maddock put in a great deal of effort contacting boost contributors, and so we are in far better shape with this release than the last one.
I am _so_ dissed :)
If so, is there a definitive list of these projects?
See http://www.boost.org/regression-logs/license_report.html
It identifies every file with a potential license or copyright problem. That allows you pretty quickly to see what the license status is of any library you are interested in.
--Beman
It's a little bit misleading to look at just the error counts in that list, because that checker also looks for missing Boost license info in documentation, which doesn't really affect users. We would do well to scan that list and make a short list of libraries that still use non-BSL licenses for this release. I offer to do that tomorrow. Doug