ImageSharp

It seems the PDFSharp rabbit hole goes even deeper than I've realized! Latest MigraDoc & PDFSharp seem to have been updated and ported to .NET 6 after a lot of the forks happened, so it was unclear to me whether there's merits in looking at other, mostly abandoned forks. I might add PdfSharpCore, though the use of SixLabors.ImageSharp and SixLabors.Fonts leads to a disqualification from the "quest", given their custom split license [1] Edit: Actually, the license seems to turn into an Apache 2.0 license, when used with an open source licensed project and also as transitive dependency. Certainly a confusing license. [1] https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp/blob/main/LICENSE

> High quality progressive decoding at reduced filesizes is a big positive for me. This is really cool! Honestly, I want to use regular progressive JPEGs for a current project of mine, but it seems that even that doesn't have support in all the tech stacks yet despite how long it's been around for, for example: https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp/issues/449 Here's hoping that in the case of JPEG-XL this will be more commonplace! In combination with loading="lazy", it would surely make the experience of scrolling through modern sites with lots of content a bit less data intensive.

Here's an example: https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp/blob/main/LICENSE#L2... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33301518 Again, nothing stops someone from forking and maintaining. Are you saying this is not legally enforceable?

Library users should come together and fork the last open source version (https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp/tree/v2.1.3) and maintain that together. Just having a version still available, even if it's got no new features, may be enough to make the Six Labors reconsider their approach because why pay for a library that can mostly work for free?

They have lot of employees: https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp/graphs/contributors

https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp/discussions/2151#dis... "The transitive clause is actually really important, I'll explain why. I've explicitly called out the following to ensure that the Split License is non viral. Once granted, You must reference the granted license only in all documentation. In practical terms this means that If you are granted a license, that's the one you're use, not the Split License which exists to derive the license to be granted to you. So if you're OSS, you should only be concerned about and reference the Apache 2.0 license - downstream consumers shouldn't need to care. That, on the surface makes the whole transitive/direct thing seem redundant except for the fact we have to use the Split License in NuGet packages, so if someone is looking up their supply chain then they can reference the transitive claus

Did you manually implement the jpeg file format? How did you get it to save without jpeg compression overwriting your bits? I'm working on a similar project https://github.com/smchughinfo/steganographyjr but so far only png files work. I think it would be nice to manually implement gifs and jpegs but they are not easy algorithms and I suspect there are multiple flavors of each so it just seems like a huge undertaking. ...i will probably try ImageSharp https://github.com/SixLabors/ImageSharp