Masahiro Nakagawa and SHOO invited to join Phobos developers

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Don" <nospam at nospam.com> wrote in message 
news:hrclc9$gjg$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> "Walter Bright" <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
>> news:hrcbrr$2t7e$1 at 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.

Besides, when 2/3 of...anything...is made up of sentences that are more than 
60 words each (I counted), it's just plain badly written, period. 
(Seriously, 60+ words per sentence?! And the first one ends with a colon, so 
it's easy to argue it's one 120+ word sentence. Talk about run-on 
unreadability!) And then, naturally, the other 1/3 is all-caps.

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.)