License suggestion: BSD 3-Clause

[steveriemannx]

Hi, thanks for your work on Arraymancer — it’s a great project for the Nim community.

I’d like to suggest considering a switch from Apache 2.0 to BSD 3-Clause. BSD is widely used in scientific computing (like NumPy), simpler to manage, and may feel more familiar to developers in this space. It could also encourage broader adoption since many Nim users prefer MIT/BSD-style licenses.

Just a thought — totally up to you, but I wanted to share the idea. Thanks again for maintaining this library!

[mratsim]

What can't you do now that you would be able to do with BSD?

[steveriemannx]

Thanks for the reply!

There’s nothing Apache 2.0 prevents — it’s more about familiarity and lowering friction. In scientific computing, many people are used to BSD/MIT‑style simplicity, especially for foundational libraries where a lightweight license often makes adoption and contributions easier.

Another reference point is the Rust ecosystem, where many crates use a dual license (Apache‑2.0 + MIT) to keep Apache’s patent protection while offering a simpler option. BSD 3‑Clause would serve a similar role on the “simple license” side.

If Apache 2.0 is intentional, that’s totally fine — just sharing the perspective.