For those who don't want to click the link for context:
OA Tree-Sitter language.
A small langauge that can be used to generate tree-sitter grammar without JS.
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]
For those who don't want to click the link for context:
OA Tree-Sitter language.
A small langauge that can be used to generate tree-sitter grammar without JS.
I think you need to put the actual license text in the repository, to have a license. Just stating a license name in the readme is not correctly licensed. In example people need to a websearch for this accronym in order to find their rights and who knows if they find the correct license. Maybe they find a different written one by another person. In example there are two "official" versions of this license: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL
I don't really want to clutter the repo with something so frivolous. If they were links or an SPDX ID would that be enough?
I don't think its enough to link. You just need to copy or create a single txt file named "LICENSE" and put it in the root of your repository. I am not a lawyer. The license text will tell anyone who cares to know what they can do and cannot with the project. If you do not do that, you only make it harder for anyone looking for the license (as explained with the websearch example previously).
There's no law specifying where the license should be. A link to a page with the license is more than enough. Though if the link ever becomes invalid or shows something else, the license is lost. That's why copying it with the source code is the best bet.