License about ilaff HOT 4 OPEN

This is a decent breakdown: https://exygy.com/blog/which-license-should-i-use-mit-vs-apache-vs-gpl/

from ilaff.

I lean towards MIT, because it is short.

from ilaff.

My understanding is that MIT would allow re-licensing as proprietary software, which I am not keen on. I like the idea of requiring that other people must distribute modified code under the same license. I know it's long but how about GNU GPLv3

from ilaff.

MIT does let people sell derivative works. It doesn't make sense to just resell it, because the license must be included, which means people should know that they can get it for free. Copyleft like GPL certainly has arguments in favour of it because any derivative works that are released must be released under the same license. I don't love how long it is and how it can make it hard to use in certain contexts, but I am happy enough to go with it.

For reference, Chroma seems to be under a 3-clause BSD license (similar to the MIT license), and RBC's Grid software is under GPLv2.

from ilaff.