Commit Graph

2 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Lucio Lelii fd30de2b1d Point the web interface at its home on the ISTI Gitea
Seven references followed the move: the licence addendum, the NOTICE, the README
attribution, the citation metadata, the package repository field and the two links
the About dialog shows a user - one of which names the backend service, so it moves
to the service's new home too.

The working notes that used to sit in docs/ are gone from the repository and named
in .gitignore, together with .claude. What remains under docs/ is the user guide,
which is written for whoever runs the application rather than for us.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-21 15:03:11 +02:00
Lucio Lelii 33150978aa Release under the AGPL with an attribution term
The repository carried no licence at all, which meant nobody could legally
build on it and the question of what a derivative owes back had no answer.

The AGPL rather than the GPL because this is a web application: under the
GPL, running a modified copy as a hosted service obliges the operator to
publish nothing, and a workflow platform is exactly the kind of thing
someone hosts. Section 13 closes that.

The additional term is the part that carries the intent - section 7(b)
permits requiring that author attributions be preserved in the Appropriate
Legal Notices a work displays, so the attribution has to survive into a
derivative's interface and not merely into a file nobody opens. It is a
permitted additional requirement, not a further restriction, so downstream
cannot strip it.

Academic citation is a request in CITATION.cff, not a licence condition:
no OSI licence can compel a citation, and pretending otherwise would put an
unenforceable clause in a document that needs to be enforceable.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-16 12:09:49 +02:00