# ModelingToolkit V11 Library Split and Licensing, Community Feedback Requested

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/modelingtoolkit-v11-library-split-and-licensing-community-feedback-requested/134396>\
**Category:** Community\
**Tags:** community, sciml, modelingtoolkit\
**Created:** [December 6, 2025, 1:37am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/modelingtoolkit-v11-library-split-and-licensing-community-feedback-requested/134396 "2025-12-06T01:37:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 89

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![isaacsas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/f6c823/32.png) [@isaacsas](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/isaacsas)\
**Post date:** [December 11, 2025, 5:42pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/modelingtoolkit-v11-library-split-and-licensing-community-feedback-requested/134396/89 "2025-12-11T17:42:20Z")

</div>

> That would also be my preference. I just don’t see how it’s possible to have dyad generated MTK components be completely independent of dyad itself and how/where SciML would host those.

That is a good point. I guess in practice only people with access to Dyad would be able to contribute to these libraries, since the MTK components are generated from Dyad, and I presume JuliaHub would want to keep the libraries structured such that the MTK components remain generated from the Dyad components.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/modelingtoolkit-v11-library-split-and-licensing-community-feedback-requested/134396)._