Licensing source?

[Dali]

LibDaisy is using MIT:

libDaisy/LICENSE at 1056ec97ae7525a0614e987b73a62065236ef740 · electro-smith/libDaisy

Hardware Library for the Daisy Audio Platform. Contribute to electro-smith/libDaisy development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

But their exemples don't have any licence tied to the code.

I'm more a Creative Commons guy even if most of the software I use at work is GPL3.

I would tend to use https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Opinions? Or do people here feel it's overkill?

 

[Dreamlands]

My understanding is that the MIT license is nonrestrictive, and so long as you include attribution in any publicly distributed derivative work (eg library or software package), you're good. Otherwise, I think a key aspect is that you can't sue the licenser for the code causing damage of any kind.

I've used MIT licensed libraries quite often in the past without the legal dept of either the big corporations I worked at raising any concerns whatsoever (having worked in both Canada and the US), but this was always for in-house software.