Add a license

[StanFromIreland]

Before licensing, we need permission from all contributors, please tick off your box if you agree with this change:

• @sethmlarson
• @ewdurbin
• @StanFromIreland
• @hugovk
• @JacobCoffee

I went with CC0 1.0 Universal as it's the one we have for the devguide, and I think it's reasonable here. I also considered the PSF2 license, but it states specifically, "this software ("Python")", so I don't think we can apply it here.

[JelleZijlstra]

CC0 is a bit unusual for software. python/bedevere and python/miss-islington are under the Apache license, maybe that's a better choice?

[StanFromIreland]

We can also go with MIT, that's what Buildbot-config is under: https://github.com/python/buildmaster-config/blob/main/LICENSE.txt

[hugovk]

Or the PSF licence in case we want the CLA bot? Compare python/release-tools#249.

I'm fine with any of PSF, Apache and MIT.

[StanFromIreland]

I don't think we can use PSF license, as I said above, it explicitly states:

otherwise using this software ("Python") in source or binary form and its associated documentation.

[hugovk]

Like this?

otherwise using this software ("PSRT GHSA Bot") in source or binary form and its associated documentation.

[StanFromIreland]

Like this?

That involves messing with licenses, and that's not something I fancy particularly so I'd rather avoid it.

[hugovk]

I don't think naming the software the licence applies to is any more controversial than naming the copyright holder or year.

And this PR didn't mention it, but I just saw you said on Discord the plan is to make this repo public, so the CLA bot will be especially useful in that case.

[StanFromIreland]

I can change it again.

but I just saw you said on Discord the plan is to make this repo public

I think we might want to limit PRs to commiters however, to avoid any possible actions attacks.

[JacobCoffee]

PSF license is good here, thanks for the revert.

[StanFromIreland]

Thanks all!