!lemmySilver

Just trying this out, don’t mind me

Now that’s a strapon if I’ve ever seen one. And it might actually get off if it goes flacid halfway 🤔

Oof, so much nostalgia!

Lost the game!

Before I forget: many thanks for your response! It’s nice to discuss this.

That distinction is important indeed. I could always add a notice to the README to underline that for potential users.

I’m going to make a dependency map of our own libs and license the language tools and their dependencies as LGPL such that they can be relatively freely embedded in other products. The post-processing and analysis libs/applications will then be licensed under the AGPL (dual licensing). We had other libraries under the GPL before, but in the current landscape it seems wise to cover the hosted/embedded variations as well.

Hmm, I don’t know of many widespread (programming) languages with an AGPL-alike license, but would love to see examples! Wouldn’t a language have a better chance of adoption with an easy to integrate licensed library?

As for some full featured visualization and analysis applications that accept the language’s data format: those might be a good fit for AGPL as they generate valuable insights.

With non-core stuff I meant a tiny wrapper around some 2D data or some color palette management. I’m fine with MIT/Apache there and would consider LGPL to keep the landscape simpler.