Not OP, but I think AGPL is generally an excellent choice for my hard work that I want to showcase.

If I care about free software but also want to "protect" my work to prevent people from forking it without releasing their contributions because of strong copyleft. Many of my open source personal projects are licensed under AGPL.

AGPL makes no sense to me for projects that aren't focused on server use. This project is a good example of something that could just have a GPL license attached to it.

I personally don't use AGPL software if I intend on trying to expand on something as a business idea. I'd be fully willing to give back bugfixes and donate back, but I'm not about to hand off anything I pour months and years into to my competitors for free.

> I'm not about to hand off anything I pour months and years into to my competitors for free.

Library authors can pour "months and years" into their projects, and yet you expect them (but not yourself) to give away their code under more permissive terms, while you keep yours closed? The (A)GPL is a great choice because it forces people like you to either (1) open up your code or (2) pay for a closed-source license.

I don't expect anyone to do anything, but if they do I intend on respecting the license. I also expect myself to give back however I can. I just don't see how you dismiss someone else's efforts. It's like valuing a home you bought and did work on, solely on how it looked before you bought it. Even if you tore down most walls and redid the flooring and interior drastically.

If copyleft is desired, the EUPL is very similar to the AGPL, but isn't viral, so you can link it as a library to a closed-source program. It's also compatible with most open-source licenses.

Not sure if it's what the OP wants, but I think it's a neat license and I don't see it used anywhere.

> Be aware that the AGPL license might be a problem for many people.

Nothing prevents the author from selling closed-source licenses, as long as they retain sole copyright over the code.

> - Be aware that the AGPL license might be a problem for many people.

I'm more confused as to why it applies to this tbh. GPL would have sufficed no?

Working on some rudimentary docs right now, the README might also be updated directly.