Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Don" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:hrclc9$gj...@digitalmars.com...
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
Saying a license isn't verbose because it's much shorter than the GPL is
like saying a particular restaurant is good just because it's better than
eating out of a dumpster.
Well, there's not many places to eat in this town, outside of the
dumpsters. Boost and zlib were the only ones I found.
Seriously, were they *trying* to prevent people from understanding it? If
so, I don't think they could have done a better job. (At least not without
hiring the FSF's "Let's do everything we can to enure our profession is
needed as much as possible" lawyers.)
Have you read the rationale statement for the Boost license? (on the
boost website).
The really appalling one is the OSI license. There's a huge document
which purports to explain the license, but it doesn't explain it at all.
It's just a polemic against the GPL. The FSF is much clearer than the OSI.
