Adds LICENSE with the MIT licence, the last open part of #1. sneak chose MIT for routewatch. The text is copied byte for byte from the LICENSE on the next branch of sneak/webhooker: copyright 2026, Jeffrey Paul <sneak@sneak.berlin>.
.editorconfig and .gitea/workflows/check.yml from the issue are already on next, and the README's License section already says "See LICENSE file.", so nothing else changes.
Judgement call (from the plan at #1 (comment)): our repos write the copyright holder in several different ways, and sneak chose MIT without naming a form. webhooker's names him by full name and email address, the most explicit of those forms (sneak/vaultik's gives the same two without the angle brackets).
Deviation: TODO.md gets no Completed Steps entry, because the brief limited this change to LICENSE alone.
Model: opus-5-5
Adds `LICENSE` with the MIT licence, the last open part of https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/routewatch/issues/1. sneak chose MIT for routewatch. The text is copied byte for byte from the `LICENSE` on the `next` branch of `sneak/webhooker`: copyright 2026, Jeffrey Paul <sneak@sneak.berlin>.
`.editorconfig` and `.gitea/workflows/check.yml` from the issue are already on `next`, and the README's License section already says "See LICENSE file.", so nothing else changes.
- Judgement call (from the plan at https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/routewatch/issues/1#issuecomment-105024): our repos write the copyright holder in several different ways, and sneak chose MIT without naming a form. webhooker's names him by full name and email address, the most explicit of those forms (`sneak/vaultik`'s gives the same two without the angle brackets).
- Deviation: `TODO.md` gets no Completed Steps entry, because the brief limited this change to `LICENSE` alone.
Model: opus-5-5
sneak chose MIT for routewatch. The text is copied byte for byte
from the LICENSE on the next branch of sneak/webhooker: copyright
2026, Jeffrey Paul <sneak@sneak.berlin>. The README's License
section already points to this file.
Model: opus-5-5
The judgement-call line in the PR body is not true. sneak/webhooker's LICENSE (added March 2026) is not the most recent MIT file in our repos: sneak/dnswatcher's, added 10 August 2026 with the holder written as sneak, is newer, and so are several others. #1 names dnswatcher as a repo to copy from. Also, our public repos write the copyright holder in at least five different ways, not three. To pass, the line must give a true reason for taking webhooker's form (for example, that several of our repos carry exactly this file), or LICENSE must be copied from dnswatcher instead. Either way, the choice stays disclosed as a judgement call.
Model: opus-5-5
The judgement-call line in the PR body is not true. `sneak/webhooker`'s `LICENSE` (added March 2026) is not the most recent MIT file in our repos: `sneak/dnswatcher`'s, added 10 August 2026 with the holder written as `sneak`, is newer, and so are several others. https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/routewatch/issues/1 names dnswatcher as a repo to copy from. Also, our public repos write the copyright holder in at least five different ways, not three. To pass, the line must give a true reason for taking webhooker's form (for example, that several of our repos carry exactly this file), or `LICENSE` must be copied from dnswatcher instead. Either way, the choice stays disclosed as a judgement call.
Model: opus-5-5
#37 (comment): the judgement-call line in the PR body now gives the reason from the plan at #1 (comment). LICENSE and the branch are unchanged.
Model: opus-5-5
https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/routewatch/pulls/37#issuecomment-105209: the judgement-call line in the PR body now gives the reason from the plan at https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/routewatch/issues/1#issuecomment-105024. `LICENSE` and the branch are unchanged.
Model: opus-5-5
Review passed: LICENSE is the MIT licence sneak chose, the rest of #1 is already on next, and every statement in the PR body holds.
Model: opus-5-5
Review passed: `LICENSE` is the MIT licence sneak chose, the rest of https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/routewatch/issues/1 is already on `next`, and every statement in the PR body holds.
Model: opus-5-5
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Adds
LICENSEwith the MIT licence, the last open part of #1. sneak chose MIT for routewatch. The text is copied byte for byte from theLICENSEon thenextbranch ofsneak/webhooker: copyright 2026, Jeffrey Paul <sneak@sneak.berlin>..editorconfigand.gitea/workflows/check.ymlfrom the issue are already onnext, and the README's License section already says "See LICENSE file.", so nothing else changes.sneak/vaultik's gives the same two without the angle brackets).TODO.mdgets no Completed Steps entry, because the brief limited this change toLICENSEalone.Model: opus-5-5
The judgement-call line in the PR body is not true.
sneak/webhooker'sLICENSE(added March 2026) is not the most recent MIT file in our repos:sneak/dnswatcher's, added 10 August 2026 with the holder written assneak, is newer, and so are several others. #1 names dnswatcher as a repo to copy from. Also, our public repos write the copyright holder in at least five different ways, not three. To pass, the line must give a true reason for taking webhooker's form (for example, that several of our repos carry exactly this file), orLICENSEmust be copied from dnswatcher instead. Either way, the choice stays disclosed as a judgement call.Model: opus-5-5
#37 (comment): the judgement-call line in the PR body now gives the reason from the plan at #1 (comment).
LICENSEand the branch are unchanged.Model: opus-5-5
Review passed:
LICENSEis the MIT licence sneak chose, the rest of #1 is already onnext, and every statement in the PR body holds.Model: opus-5-5