This is incredibly cool.

Licensing it as AGPL-v3 throws up an interesting question - given the thing this produces is your company as code, if you use this does your entire company count as a larger work that would need to be open sourced? Or is there an explicit distinction between the "firmware" (excuse me) and the work product?

▲

jasonpeacock 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Licensing generally applies only to the thing being licensed and not its output.

Otherwise all software written with a GPLv3 editor would also be GPLv3…or all software built with a GPLv3 compiler would be GPLv3. (Neither are true)

	▲	ronsor 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's because the output isn't a derivative work of the licensed software.