> What? SuperCollider is GPL.
Exactly. That is a restrictive license, and no one is going to use it (it being Supercollider) in anything resembling a commercial product. A lot of these programmatic audio systems make their way into things like installations and video games. Supercollider can't be used in commercial instances except when you're just releasing music.
GPL software is used commercially. Have you heard of Linux?
However, it is relevant because, as I said, a nice benefit of these sound engines is that they can be embedded in other languages and applications. Thus, when choosing such a sound engine, the licensing is an input to the decision, and other systems, such as Pure Data and Csound, have more permissive licenses. For example, the absolutely excellent iVCS3 app on iOS is built on Csound: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ivcs3/id665703927.
> […] and no one is going to use it […] in anything resembling a commercial product.
Ignoring the fact that this is demonstrably false, why would it be a problem if it was actually true?
There is nothing to stop a commercial interest writing their own, or licensing something from elsewhere. Depending on the contribution structure for this project (caveat: I've not looked into this at all) it may even be possible to license this project for non-GPL-compliant use. Or, you know, release the resulting project under the GPL.
The GPL is less restrictive than most commercial licensing, so judging it as restrictive because it can be difficult to justify in some (many?) commercial contexts is somewhat hypercritical IMO. Commercial licences can be just as "viral" and depending on the owner inadvertent infection (by using some code without properly verifying is origin & license first) can be more fatal to a project.
You refrained from answering the question: if it was true, why would it matter?
Supplementary questions: If I release some software covered by, for instance, AGPLv3, why would it be a problem for me that commercial projects wouldn't use it? Why would it necessarily be a problem for my code's users?
Please just read my other comments and quit arguing about licensing to me. I am much more interested in just hearing about the features and applications of Csound and others.
Csound and Pure Data are more attractive, to me but likely others, because I can freely bundle them and apply them as I please without tiptoeing around a license, not to mention they have their own pros as far as sound generation goes. Supercollider was presented as an alternative to Csound, but I simply pointed out that if you care about embedding the system into something else, Csound is more friendly to that, as is Pure Data.
However, most people use SuperCollider as a tool to create music; in this case the GPL does not apply.
> and no one is going to use it (it being Supercollider) in anything resembling a commercial product.
This is patently false.
