> A Creative Commons licences sounds like the right general approach (I
> have no informed opinion on which would be appropriate).

OK, I'll put CC0 in the repo's LICENSE file since Awesome is using it
and you approve of it. In case someone wants to suggest something
different, we can still change it.

> What about code in the registry?  Snippets might not pose a problem,
> but it should have a policy about fully featured things starting with
> a single procedure implementation of something as simple as a CRC
> checksum generator.
>
> I'm thinking of a policy of curating such things in one or more
> files organizing and indexing "generally useful stuff", with pointers
> to repos, tarballs, etc. of the code itself, and behind the scenes
> also making backups of them, so if the site rots or the user is banned
> the code it contained can be resurrected.
>
> Acceptable software licenses for those should be defined, either
> anything https://opensource.org/licenses approved, or we could take
> a stand against all or almost all viral licenses.  I certainly do,
> the moment I see GPL/LGPL or worse I move it into "perhaps examine
> for ideas category.  We are not a popular and big enough community
> to allow members of it to try to force copyleft on everyone else.
>
> An exception is the Eclipse license; while the boundary isn't
> precisely defined, it's clear enough for me, if you modify the stuff
> released under it, it's copyleft, you have an entirely reasonable
> reciprocal duty to the community that provided it to you.  But
> anything that for example links or uses it remains your own IP.  E.g.
> patch the core if Clojure and you have a duty to make this available,
> but your independent code written in Clojure is yours.

What kinds of code snippets would the registry need to contain? I
thought it would just be some simple lists, and link to external sources
for anything complicated.