Licence, provenance, and possible coordination for `snesrecomp`

[SynapticDreams]

Hello — we are developing a deterministic SNES analysis and recompilation
platform, with optional HD-remake workflows and a strong focus on testing,
provenance, and user-supplied content. Your mstan/snesrecomp repository is
clearly relevant prior art, so we want to avoid both source misuse and naming
confusion.

Would you be willing to clarify the licence you intend for the repository and
the copyright/contributor provenance of its code? We would also appreciate any
information about dependency licences and commercial-use compatibility,
whether you are open to collaboration or separately licensed component use,
expectations around stable public interfaces and regression testing, and your
view on project-name differentiation and long-term governance.

We have not copied or adapted your source and will keep it outside our
implementation boundary unless suitable written permission and provenance are
reviewed. We are happy to discuss goals and a contribution model before
proposing technical changes. Thank you.

[mstan]

Hello! I've gone ahead and specified the license on snesrecomp to match that of my other projects. At this time, I am using a non commercial polyform license, which grants non-commercial use, modification, and redistribution of all snesrecomp components, excluding any third party licensed code.

My long term aspiration for this and my other ecosystem projects is to make them ultimately collaborative, so I am open to the idea of a broadened governance that extends beyond myself. To date, there is no formal governance beyond myself maintaining and accepting contributions on this repository as a volunteer effort.

As for branding and name differentiation, I believe I would need more information before I'm able to make a decision, but I am open the naming/branding being used once I better understand the conditions.

Noting the stable API and interfaces. The project has grown organically, and as it is a volunteer effort of mine, there has not been excess focus on a rigid API. With that said, as the project has matured, I think that maturity in its API is critical for its success as a project long term and it is likely at a place where the API is less likely to drastically change moving forward, but I think we would need to discuss that as part of future governance.

With regards to commercialization, by default I did not build these ecosystems for commercial purposes. If there is commercial interest, I believe that would need to be something we discuss before I can make a decision on whether or not I'm comfortable with commercial use.

I hope this response is helpful, but I anticipate there is plenty to continue to be discussed.

If you would like to discuss further, I welcome you to reach out to me via Discord. My handle is simply gamemaster. You may also join the Retro AI Development Community listed on this project and reach out to me that way if you are unable to do so directly via Discord DMs.

If you would prefer a more formal method, do let me know and we can find a way to exchange emails.

Thank you and take care!