"Jeff Garland" <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com> writes:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:36:29 -0400, David Abrahams wrote
Thanks that's nice. I've been thinking about this more. You will notice all the 'issues' in date-time amount to code in the examples subtree and documentation. I've been resisting cluttering example code with copyright and licensing stuff. But now I'm thinking that this can just be tagged onto the bottom. I suppose docs are pretty much the same.
Ah, no, I don't think so. I'm pretty sure license/copyright info needs to go near the top of files. Uniformity is the name of the game where making lawyers comfortable is concerned.
Well, I hate to get ornery, but we aren't here to serve the lawyers.
No, we're here to serve the C++ community. Inasmuch as corporate lawyers are uncomfortable with the format, it will inhibit programmers from using Boost.
I'm certain that legally it can go anywhere in the file.
Me too.
When the license/copyright is at the top it just interferes with the documentation. Remember I'm not talking about source files in the library -- I'm talking about stuff in the example subtree that winds up in the documentation.
Is there some reason the documentation needs to show the license/copyright portion of the example files??
And if the lawyers can't figure out how to use grep then too bad -- maybe they could hire one of us poor programmers to write a program to help them sort it out...
Actually, that's what they're doing at several large companies. Evaluating all of Boost is still an enormous task. I think we should make it as painless as possible. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com