3 ms·

You are not the first one to bring this up AlexeyBrin. To be totally honest, I have not yet made my mind up how to license this. But I'm open to suggestions. Th

You are not the first one to bring this up AlexeyBrin. To be totally honest, I have not yet made my mind up how to license this. But I'm open to suggestions. There is the source-available core part of the library and then there is the open source language binding part including the docs. I understand it's not the most conventional setup but I think this is the only way I can maintain this in the long run. Regarding your concern about the name. When you look at Processing and p5.js or CProcessing, they all are complete re-implementations of the Processing API. With Precessing, I try to have a shared core but offer multiple language bindings. The way I see it, Precessing to Processing is similar when comparing Preact to React, i.e. it's smaller and faster. Feature-wise we are not there yet, but it's just literally the 3rd version that has been released.

AlexeyBrin 4y ago
Just an idea (take into consideration that I'm not a lawyer so I may be wrong). You can try something like a dual license: an open source one like AGPL for hobbyists and people that want to use it in an open source project, and for companies or people that want to use it commercially should be able to buy a commercial license and use it in their closed source code/apps. Otherwise I think following the API of Processing in C is not a bad idea and I know that implementing the backend for a few operating systems implies a lot of work. You can also look into how other people fund their open source work like the implementer of the Zig programming language Andrew Kelly and the implementer of SerenityOS.