Phobos-compatible license on Google Code?

[Robert Jacques]

On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 22:50:18 -0400, Justin Spahr-Summers  
<Justin.SpahrSummers at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 02:47:30 +0000 (UTC), retard <re at tard.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>>
>> Fri, 30 Jul 2010 21:41:44 -0500, Justin Spahr-Summers wrote:
>>
>> > Google Code allows selection from the following licenses for new
>> > projects:
>> >
>> > Apache License 2.0
>> > Artistic License/GPL
>> > Eclipse Public License 1.0
>> > GPL v2
>> > GPL v3
>> > LGPL
>> > MIT License
>> > Mozilla Public License 1.1
>> > New BSD License
>> >
>> > Obviously, the GNU licenses are out of the question (listed only for
>> > completeness). But of the rest, are any compatible with the Boost
>> > license used for Phobos? Dual-licensing is always an option too, but
>> > certainly a lot uglier.
>>
>> They're all compatible with Phobos. The point was to make Phobos as
>> compatible as possible with various kinds of other licenses. What you
>> probably wanted to know is whether code contributions to Phobos can be
>> licensed under these licenses. They probably want to use the same  
>> license
>> (Boost in this case), if possible.
>
> Yes, thank you. I misworded my original question. I was hoping to host
> on Google Code, because it's been the most reliable and functional
> (free) project hosting I've found, and I'd love to entertain hopes of
> eventually submitting the code as a Phobos module.

Sorry, none of them are compatible with submitting to Phobos without  
dual-licensing. However, since Boost is compatible with all of these, you  
could make the project MIT, for example, and then have each file licensed  
under Boost.