Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Walter Bright" <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:hrcbrr$2t7...@digitalmars.com...
Moritz Warning wrote:
Maybe you can talk to the Tango devs to clear up this matter?
I suggest that the Tango devs convert the Tango modules that can get full
agreement by their respective devs be converted to the Boost license. The
Boost license is free of the legal problems that BSD has, and is
compatible with the Phobos license.
It looks like the Tango devs are pretty much settled on BSD-only with some
hack to get around the binary attribution thing:
http://www.dsource.org/projects/tango/ticket/1701 (*Shrug*, well, at least
it's not as insanely verbose and impenetrable as Apache 2.0...)
I *hate* licenses...(That's why I use the zlib one, none of the public
domain problems, all of the freedoms that I've been told Boost offers, and
none of Boost's idiotic over-verbosity.)
Yeah, we all feel the same way.
But I don't think the boost license is verbose. It's 4% of the length of
the GPL:
zlib: 957 characters
boost: 1361 (1/3 of which comes from US legal requirements).
Apache2: 9219
Academic free license3: 10332
GPL 3: 32069
