Choose a license

[pinobatch]

For the avoidance of doubt, it would help to specify the terms under which users may use and share this script. I acknowledge that the closure of #1 without comment indicates that GPLv3 was rejected as a license. So what is the license?

[sasawat]

I'm not quite sure what license is appropriate for 7 lines of code mostly copied from StackOverflow.

[chung1905]

MIT license is great. Or at least use this license if you think MIT is too long: http://www.wtfpl.net/

[sasawat]

Afaik, MIT is more permissive than StackOverflow, and since the script was written using Copy-Paste Driven Development from StackOverflow, it might not be appropriate to re-license under MIT.

StackOverflow licensing itself is murky and complicated, and rules for using and attributing StackOverflow code have had subtle differences at various companies I have worked for.

In addition, the script is 7 lines, 1 of which being boilerplate, and 1 of which being an aesthetic gap. Code of such short length has often been argued as "trivial" and therefore can be reused without license, which is an argument made on shaky ground, but commonly made by widely respected organizations.

Therefore, I have so far chosen to simply link the relevant StackOverflow question, and not suggest that I understand the legal consequences of using this code.

[prashnts]

You could use a CC-0 Public Domain licence as a documentation, maybe @sasawat ?

(with citation to SO link)