Add LICENSE file.

[mkillianey]

I've added the ISC license. (Not sure whether or not this was intentionally licensed as ISC instead of MIT, like some of the other crypto-browserify packages...please let me know if this isn't what you wanted.)

[dcousens]

Granted the main contributor is @calvinmetcalf, I'd prefer if it said:

Copyright (c) 2015 browserify-sign contributors

or something

[calvinmetcalf]

A couple things

• I've privatized myself and no longer work for the state so I know use a Gmail account primarily.
• we probably want at least one name in the licence.

[dcousens]

we probably want at least one name in the licence.

Any reason?

[calvinmetcalf]

So there is somebody that a person can email or contact or something I
figure it can't hurt.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015, 5:30 PM Daniel Cousens notifications@github.com
wrote:

we probably want at least one name in the licence.

Any reason?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#21 (comment)
.

[dcousens]

@calvinmetcalf maybe put that in a contributor list item then?
It seemed odd to me that projects often have hundreds of contributors, and then just 1 copyright holder.
I'd rather see the copyrights just listed as those who did the work, plain and simply.

[calvinmetcalf]

I didn't say only one copyright holder, I was thinking (c) name and
contributors

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 6:07 PM Daniel Cousens notifications@github.com
wrote:

@calvinmetcalf https://github.com/calvinmetcalf maybe put that in a
contributor list item then?
It seemed odd to me that projects often have hundreds of contributors, and
then just 1 copyright holder.
I'd rather see the copyrights just assigned to those who did the work,
plain and simply.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#21 (comment)
.

[dcousens]

@calvinmetcalf works for me, semantically the same but addresses the issue you raised. 👍

@mkillianey are you up to make that change?

[mkillianey]

Happy to make the change (and/or have you make the change), whichever's less trouble for you.

I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know if there's a downside to listing "browserify-sign contributors" in the copyright. For example, if you eventually take this pull request, does that mean that I'm a contributor, and does that confer some rights to me that I really shouldn't have? Or do we kinda trust that licenses like ISC and MIT make that a moot point?

As for the author/contributors fields in the package.json, I'll uncomplicate the pull request(s) by removing that change from all my browserify pull requests. For my purposes, I just want to know what text I should use to fairly/correctly acknowledge your wonderful work.

[calvinmetcalf]

@mkillianey I think we want to go with (for this one) Calvin Metcalf & contributors