I removed the paragraph that imposed licensing requirements on derivative
works. I agree that it was contrary to the intention of the Boost license.

The paragraph beginning "Any contribution shall be deemed to be made
pursuant to the terms of the Boost Software License - Version 1.0..."
remains. It is there to avoid situations where someone submits a pull
request that contains something that in some way would make part of the
repo not available under the Boost 1.0 license and that pull request is
accepted. We want to focus on the code in pull requests, not on whether
something in it would, but for that paragraph, introduce something into the
repo that would not be available under the terms of BSL 1.0.

Hope that helps.

-Mike




On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 9:35 PM Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash <
brycelelbach_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Michael, Guy
>
> Some of us at NVIDIA were taking a look at the P0267 reference
> implementation, and we're a bit confused about the licensing of this
> software. The repo first states that it is under the Boost Software
> License, but then states:
>
> "Any contribution shall be deemed to be made pursuant to the terms of
> the Boost Software License - Version 1.0, without regard to any
> attempt, whether by statement, inclusion of a license file, inclusion
> of license terms within any file, or any other method, to impose any
> other license."
>
> "If your code is a derivative work of the reference implementation it
> must be licensed under the terms of the Boost Software License -
> Version 1.0 unless you obtain an express, written waiver from the
> original author of the reference implementation, Michael B.
> McLaughlin. (Literally written, as in fixed on paper, signed, and
> physically mailed to you), except as provided above."
>
> But those two paragraphs seem anathema to how the Boost Software License
> works.
>
> Can you clarify whether this software is licensed under the Boost
> Software License (full stop), or whether it is under some derivative
> of the Boost Software License as described in the README:
>
>
> https://github.com/cpp-io2d/P0267_RefImpl#licenses-and-contributions-important
>
> I ask because we are unsure whether or not we can actually look at the
> code given the confusion about the licensing.
>
> If it's under the Boost Software License, I suggest deleting the part
> of the README that doesn't say "this software is licensed under the
> Boost Software License". If it's not under the Boost Software License,
> please clarify that.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Bryce Adelstein Lelbach aka wash
> CUDA Core C++ Libraries Lead @ NVIDIA
> ISO C++ Library Evolution Incubator Chair
> ISO C++ Tooling Chair
> CppCon and C++Now Program Chair
> CUDA Convert and Reformed AVX Junkie
>
> Sleep is for the weak
> --
>