> There is a huge gap between something like boost that is designed to be reused and internal libraries that are subject to the usual corporate constraints (the least amount of work is done if even that)
You're somehow trying to imply that libraries are not reusable if they are not widely shared, which makes no sense at all.
The best argument you could make is regarding stability, but you simply cannot lay any such claim just from the library's licensing.
Accusing internal libraries of being half-baked, badly designed, or bug-riddled is just a cheap blanket putdown.
You're somehow trying to imply that libraries are not reusable if they are not widely shared, which makes no sense at all.
The best argument you could make is regarding stability, but you simply cannot lay any such claim just from the library's licensing.
Accusing internal libraries of being half-baked, badly designed, or bug-riddled is just a cheap blanket putdown.