Feature: include LICENSE.md to denote a license for this project

[jpmcb]

Type of feature

🍕 Feature

Current behavior

There's currently no license or attribution.

Suggested solution

We'll need a license before we merge in #1 - cc @bdougie for your preference of license on this project. My gut is probably a permissive MIT license since we'll be using other open source, permissive ML models.

Additional context

No response

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

Contributing Docs

• I agree to follow this project's Contribution Docs

[bdougie]

Yes, MIT is ideal since we don't own a trademark on repo-query which is why we'd want to do Apache. The alternative is ISC, which we use in catsup. But MIT is fine.

One thing I wanted to ask but I haven't dug in. Are we omitting projects that don't have a license or a permissable license at least? If not, we should track that as a needed launch feature.

[jpmcb]

Are we omitting projects that don't have a license or a permissable license at least? If not, we should track that as a needed launch feature.

Good question: I don't believe so. Certain files are ignored (like node_modules, etc.) but we'll need to add the feature to ignore repos that do not have a permissible license. I'll make an issue for that.