<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Popular on Your License</title><link>https://yourlicense.ca.dev.prosyon.ca/tags/popular/</link><description>Recent content in Popular on Your License</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-ca</language><atom:link href="https://yourlicense.ca.dev.prosyon.ca/tags/popular/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Apache License 2.0</title><link>https://yourlicense.ca.dev.prosyon.ca/licenses/apache-2.0/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://yourlicense.ca.dev.prosyon.ca/licenses/apache-2.0/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Apache 2.0 is a permissive license similar in spirit to MIT but with two key additions: an explicit patent grant from contributors, and an explicit requirement to document significant changes. It does not grant trademark rights.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The patent grant makes Apache 2.0 preferable for projects with many contributors or corporate sponsors — it reduces the risk of patent lawsuits against downstream users. Apache 2.0 is not compatible with GPL-2.0, but is compatible with GPL-3.0 and later.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>MIT License</title><link>https://yourlicense.ca.dev.prosyon.ca/licenses/mit/</link><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://yourlicense.ca.dev.prosyon.ca/licenses/mit/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;The MIT License is one of the shortest and most permissive open-source licenses. It lets anyone use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and sell copies of the software, provided they include the original copyright notice and license text.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It is a good default for libraries and frameworks you want adopted as widely as possible. If you care about protecting against patent claims from contributors, consider Apache-2.0 instead — the patent grant is the main difference.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>