[mnahkies]

The licence terms / variation on MIT is interesting - unless this file is part of some standard I'm unaware of I'd expect it still shows as plain MIT for most automated SBOM collection/licence checks which feels problematic.

(https://github.com/rustrum/apate/blob/main/LICENSE-TERMS)

[embedding-shape]

Ouch, why even involve the MIT license if you're gonna do custom terms anyways? Just put "Copyright me" and be done with it instead of ending up with some weird half and half solution. Net effect ends up the same anyways.

[rumatoest]

I just thought that MIT for subset of users is better than "My Own License"

[rumatoest]

Well the point here is that if I created it by myself I can make whatever license I want. But I do not want to write my own license. AFAIK even if you grant something for subset of users for "free" you have to define legally terms of this "free" usage.

[rsyring]

Yeah, that kills adoption by most people I'd imagine. Non-standard license terms are always a huge red flag IMO, regardless of actual license terms.

[rumatoest]

It is simple. If you do not like it - do not use it. I do not care. Have no plans to conquer the world with this project :)