The GPL allows you to modify the source and provide a service on a public server without having to share your modifications.*
But I understand if you prefer a more permissíve license. Lots of people go with MIT License, it's very short, permissive and compatible with the GPL. Apache v2 is also compatible.
Last time I tried understanding the key subtleties of the EPL I came out empty handed, but it would seem it's more viral than the permissive licenses above, bit less so than the GPL.
* That's why the AGPL exists, so someone working on a Lux REPL would only have to show the code for his online Lux modifications if Lux was AGPL.
Comments
In the future, I plan to rewrite the Lux compiler in Lux itself, and one of the reasons is to allow people to embed it and use it's API.
That way, if someone wants to create an online Lux REPL for people to try Lux, it won't be hard for them to do so.
The GPL allows you to modify the source and provide a service on a public server without having to share your modifications.*
But I understand if you prefer a more permissíve license. Lots of people go with MIT License, it's very short, permissive and compatible with the GPL. Apache v2 is also compatible.
See here about EPL being incompatible: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/using-the-gpl-for-eclips...
Last time I tried understanding the key subtleties of the EPL I came out empty handed, but it would seem it's more viral than the permissive licenses above, bit less so than the GPL.
* That's why the AGPL exists, so someone working on a Lux REPL would only have to show the code for his online Lux modifications if Lux was AGPL.