Repo does not have a license

[teoguso]

TL;DR: As long as we don't have a license, we can't technically let other people use this code.

There is no license specified for this repository. This means that technically nobody who is not the owner of the repo is allowed to use or modify the code (i.e. implicit "all rights reserved").

MIT license would be the popular choice, but also ultra libertarian. Maybe FreeBSD could be a better idea? Please add ideas as you see fit.

[djbusstop]

I usually just go for the ISC license for code that I don't care how it's used.

If I care if people put it in "for profit" code, then I would pick one that requires that the software be shared with the same license as my code, a la Copy Left. I think for us, Copy Left is a good way to go, because then only people who are making free to distribute and modify code can do so, but people who want to profit off of our code can not.

So my advice is GPL :)

[adrinjalali]

I used to be a hardcore GPL fan, but my position has softened and now I'm okay with BSD and MIT since they're more permissive and they allow a wider adoption.