Question about licence for "boost" libraries

[Chris Chabot]

Some package i was trying to give a review has a much newer upstream
version available, however it requires the "boost filesystem" libraries
to function (c++ libs)

The licence used for these libraries is the "Boost Software Licence",
described here: http://www.boost.org/more/license_info.html

The full licence is here: http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt

Relevant information seems to be:
How is the Boost license different from the GNU General Public License
(GPL)?

The Boost license permits the creation of derivative works for
commercial or non-commercial use with no legal requirement to release
your source code. Other differences include Boost not requiring
reproduction of copyright messages for object code redistribution, and
the fact that the Boost license is not "viral": if you distribute your
own code along with some Boost code, the Boost license applies only to
the Boost code (and modified versions thereof); you are free to license
your own code under any terms you like. The GPL is also much longer, and
thus may be harder to understand.
 

Is it safe and ok to package this for Fedora? Seems to be a much more
free licence, and allows distribution of the source/compiled package, so
should be ok right?

	-- Chris Chabot

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060112/9252bf74/attachment.sig>