License changes

[skurhse]

• Add license section to README.
• Add MIT and Apache licenses.
• Remove MPL license.

[vprime]

I think Apache & MIT options are typically good for this sort of project.

[No767]

I haven't had time to contribute my opinion, but the question remains why? What advantages and disadvantages does this bring, and what opportunity costs are we making. Apache-2.0 ultimately is just a more legally verbose version of the MIT license if I recall.

In short, I am unsure of the decision and that's why I kept it on my tab but not approving the review

[skurhse]

I haven't had time to contribute my opinion, but the question remains why? What advantages and disadvantages does this bring, and what opportunity costs are we making. Apache-2.0 ultimately is just a more legally verbose version of the MIT license if I recall.

In short, I am unsure of the decision and that's why I kept it on my tab but not approving the review

The dual licensing is a pragma I took from the rust crates template. It's meant to empower the user to have more licensing options.

[skurhse]

see: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/rationale-of-apache-dual-licensing/8952

[No767]

see: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/rationale-of-apache-dual-licensing/8952

I actually read this already. but thanks

[skurhse]

here is the official answer: https://prev.rust-lang.org/en-US/faq.html#why-a-dual-mit-asl2-license

generally with licenses we want to go with a well-known, community-supported solution. I would personally be happy with just ASL2 if GPLv2 compatibility is not a concern. (probable)