The repository is public and intended to be shared, but it currently does not specify a license.
A clear license would help readers understand whether and how they can reuse, translate, quote, or adapt the guide.
Possible options to consider:
- MIT, if the owner wants a simple permissive license for code and docs.
- CC BY 4.0, if the guide should be treated mainly as written content with attribution.
- CC BY-SA 4.0, if adaptations should remain share-alike.
This issue needs the repository owner to choose the intended license before a PR is opened.
The repository is public and intended to be shared, but it currently does not specify a license.
A clear license would help readers understand whether and how they can reuse, translate, quote, or adapt the guide.
Possible options to consider:
This issue needs the repository owner to choose the intended license before a PR is opened.