SESTER — dual-licensed Apache-2.0 OR AGPL-3.0

You may use this work under the terms of either license, at your option:

  * Apache License 2.0  — [`LICENSES/Apache-2.0`](LICENSES/Apache-2.0)
  * GNU AGPL v3.0       — [`LICENSES/AGPL-3.0`](LICENSES/AGPL-3.0)

## Why dual (decision 2026-09-21, ADR-0001 §11)

Apache-2.0 keeps the door open for commercial integrators who cannot ship
copyleft — payment rails, banks, and enterprise stacks often have "no AGPL"
policies, and the API-gateway use case lives squarely in that world. AGPL-3.0
protects the contribution network: anyone who runs Sester as a network
service and modifies it must offer the source to the users of that service.

Neither license alone served both goals: pure Apache lets a cloud operator
take the project private; pure AGPL blocks exactly the adopters the product
exists to serve. Dual-licensing is the standard reconciliation — the user
chooses per integration, not the project per release.

## Applying it

Downstream code declares which it uses (e.g. `SPDX-License-Identifier:
Apache-2.0` in your headers). Contributions to this repository come in
under both terms simultaneously, so the project can relicense forward
without re-asking every contributor — the point of dual rather than
mutually-exclusive licensing.

For legal review: this is "or"-dual-licensing (recipient's choice), not
incompatible-stacking.

## Copyright

Copyright 2026 SESTER contributors. See the git history for authorship.

SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 OR AGPL-3.0
