From: Aleksey Gurtovoy (agurtovoy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-05-20 00:21:36
David B. Held writes:
> Is this the canonical way to license a Boost library?
>
> // Copyright 20xx. I. M. Author
> // Use, modification, and distribution are subject to the Boost Software
> // License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or
> // copy at www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
Not anymore.
>
> If we don't want to include the actual license text in the library itself
> (nor does it seem desirable, when distributed with all of Boost),
> does it make more sense to abbreviate it to:
>
> // Copyright 20xx. I. M. Author
> // Use, modification, and distribution are subject to the Boost Software
> // License, Version 1.0. (See www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
>
> And did we agree that "use, modification, and distribution" is
> sufficient, or do we need to mention something about display
> rights?
Please see http://tinyurl.com/2qpgg.
-- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering