Would you consider using a different software license? This library is fantastic. However, it is not possible to use at some companies which prohibit the use of the LGPL license. I completely respect the decision to use LGPL if it accurately reflects the intentions of this project.
However, if another license such as MIT or BSD would be acceptable, then it would be possible for more companies to use this package as part of private projects.
I am not a lawyer and I am not one of those people who are passionately versed in the details of open source licensing and philosophy. I am just an engineer who likes using your package and needs to comply with corporate software policies. Therefore, I probably won't be able to help much with answering any detailed questions about why one license is better than another. I respect the decision of the maintainers regardless of which way you go.
Would you consider using a different software license? This library is fantastic. However, it is not possible to use at some companies which prohibit the use of the LGPL license. I completely respect the decision to use LGPL if it accurately reflects the intentions of this project.
However, if another license such as MIT or BSD would be acceptable, then it would be possible for more companies to use this package as part of private projects.
I am not a lawyer and I am not one of those people who are passionately versed in the details of open source licensing and philosophy. I am just an engineer who likes using your package and needs to comply with corporate software policies. Therefore, I probably won't be able to help much with answering any detailed questions about why one license is better than another. I respect the decision of the maintainers regardless of which way you go.