HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is quite possibly the legal technicality of the year, though I believe it would satisfy the requirements as literally interpreted.<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Ellery Newcomer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ellery-newcomer@utulsa.edu">ellery-newcomer@utulsa.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">Don Clugston <dclugston@...> writes:<br>
<br>
><br>
> I tried hard to get Tango to use the Boost license. More recently, I<br>
> tried to get the Boost license available as a standard option in the<br>
> Tango ddoc templates. They wouldn't even do that, and someone modified<br>
> my "support Boost license" ticket into "support Apache 2.0 license"<br>
> !!!!<br>
> I concluded that there is little chance of healing the Tango-Phobos<br>
> rift, because there are people on the Tango side who do not want<br>
> unity.<br>
> Sadly, it only takes one to tango.<br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>What's the consensus over here on the tango team's solution to the binary<br>
attribution clause? They say they're going to include the license as a static<br>
string somewhere in the source code to pull the bother off the user.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
phobos mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:phobos@puremagic.com">phobos@puremagic.com</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos" target="_blank">http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>