License

[srfoster]

I didn't see a license file. Did I miss it?

[prominentdetail]

I wasn't sure which one to use. Do you have a suggestion for a specific license to use?

[srfoster]

Judging from the fact that you didn't include one, I'm guessing you don't have a super strong opinion about software licensing. Therefore, I'd recommend for simplicity -- the MIT License:

The MIT License (MIT)

Copyright (c)

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.

[prominentdetail]

Yeah, I was leaning towards that one too. It kind of concerns me that people can profit off of my work, but as long as I receive some credit then I'll feel alright about it. Hopefully the use of the MIT license will let others feel more interested in contributing to the project in whatever way and better things can emerge from that!