Add license

[kevinsawicki]

We should probably decide on a license before the private alpha starts.

This PR is an attempt at that with an initial choice of the MIT license.

Once we agree on one for atom/atom, I'll update all other package repos with the same license.

/cc @hoolio @defunkt

[defunkt]

I've always been a fan of MIT. I don't know what we should be thinking about legally here, but it's my go-to license and I love seeing GitHub open source software licensed under it.

[hoolio]

Everyone likes MIT b/c it's short and sweet, but personally I think that Apache will work better for us. MIT is silent on patent issues, for instance, and Apache makes clear that third-parties have patent rights over the work as long as they don't go around and sue someone on a silly patent claim.

@stevekrause and @talniv -- thoughts?

[kevinsawicki]

@hoolio Just a heads up, @stevekrause and @talniv were not in the Atom org. at the time of your comment and since this repo is currently private they wouldn't get that @mention ping.

I added them to the org. so they should be pinged by this comment.

[nathansobo]

I'm 👍 on anything that can make the world a better place with regard to silly patent claims.

[talniv]

I'm all for Apache for the reason @hoolio mentioned.
Thanks @kevinsawicki.

[kevinsawicki]

I switched it to Apache, anyone else have any other feedback before I merge this in?

[stevekrause]

Works for me. Thanks, @kevinsawicki.