Boost Software License Progress As Of 20040814
http://stl.nuwen.net/bsl2.html (didn't try to cover python and serialization - did they get fixed yet?) Progress is awesome! However, there's still low-hanging fruit, and there's still some work to be done: * Authors We Need For The BSL "John R Bandela" is in blanket-permission.txt as "John Bandela". "Robert Ramey - http www rrsd com" is in blanket-permission.txt as "Robert Ramey". "Thorsten Ottosen" is in blanket-permission.txt as "Thorsten Jørgen Ottosen". It should be really easy to take care of these aliases. * See the "Old style Boost licence #8" - bcp is getting /terribly/ confused about the file boost/archive/impl/basic_xml_grammar.hpp . * There are 86 files with no recognizable license information, and 247 with no recognizable copyright holder. The latter are all MPL though. * The 20 files that have been automatically BSLed look good to me - no obvious munging, though I don't know if I should be looking for anything specific. * There are still 641 files that have not been BSLed (I think this category is disjoint from no-license and no-copyright). Compare this to the 4738 BSLed files! Whoo! Is bcp being enhanced to annotate which Boost modules are entirely BSLed and which aren't yet? This could go in the Input Information section; each module could have a tag saying "Not BSLed", "BSLed, But Dependent On Modules Not BSLed", and "BSLed". Also I don't know if my technique of getting bcp to report on all directory names in boost/libs is catching everything or not. Stephan T. Lavavej [I'm just a Booster, I don't speak for Microsoft]
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:20:27 -0700, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote
http://stl.nuwen.net/bsl2.html (didn't try to cover python and serialization - did they get fixed yet?)
Progress is awesome!
However, there's still low-hanging fruit, and there's still some work to be done:
* Authors We Need For The BSL
"John R Bandela" is in blanket-permission.txt as "John Bandela". "Robert Ramey - http www rrsd com" is in blanket-permission.txt as "Robert Ramey". "Thorsten Ottosen" is in blanket-permission.txt as "Thorsten Jørgen Ottosen".
I see there is still a 'problem' with the date_time copyright blanket permission in the audit -- but that permission has already been granted (Copyright is listed as CrystalClear Software) -- see: http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg68246.php Jeff
I see there is still a 'problem' with the date_time copyright blanket permission in the audit -- but that permission has already been granted (Copyright is listed as CrystalClear Software) -- see:
Are you sure? I don't see CrystalClear Software in the list of needed permissions, nor any date_time files in the list of files that cannot be moved over. What am I missing? John.
"Stephan T. Lavavej" <stl@nuwen.net> writes:
http://stl.nuwen.net/bsl2.html (didn't try to cover python
Why not?
and serialization - did they get fixed yet?)
What do you mean? What was broken? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
* Authors We Need For The BSL
"John R Bandela" is in blanket-permission.txt as "John Bandela". "Robert Ramey - http www rrsd com" is in blanket-permission.txt as "Robert Ramey". "Thorsten Ottosen" is in blanket-permission.txt as "Thorsten Jørgen Ottosen".
It should be really easy to take care of these aliases.
Done, I've added the Aliases to blanket-permission.txt, and fixed up the regex scanning to pick up on Robert Ramey's web address.
* See the "Old style Boost licence #8" - bcp is getting /terribly/ confused about the file boost/archive/impl/basic_xml_grammar.hpp .
Because it has *two* licences in it. Not much we can do about that.
* There are 86 files with no recognizable license information, and 247 with no recognizable copyright holder. The latter are all MPL though.
Yep, I wish we could handle those better, and it looks like we still need another push to get rid of those files with no license at all.
* The 20 files that have been automatically BSLed look good to me - no obvious munging, though I don't know if I should be looking for anything specific.
* There are still 641 files that have not been BSLed (I think this category is disjoint from no-license and no-copyright).
Compare this to the 4738 BSLed files! Whoo!
Is bcp being enhanced to annotate which Boost modules are entirely BSLed and which aren't yet? This could go in the Input Information section; each module could have a tag saying "Not BSLed", "BSLed, But Dependent On Modules Not BSLed", and "BSLed".
Also I don't know if my technique of getting bcp to report on all
Maybe, probably it would just have to be a Yes or no answer - bcp can't really tell which file "belongs" to whom. directory names in boost/libs is catching everything or not. I use "." as the module name, of course then it flags up a whole load of new problems :-( Thanks, John.
participants (4)
-
David Abrahams -
Jeff Garland -
John Maddock -
Stephan T. Lavavej