Relicense under a simpler & free license?

[refaktor]

I looked at the comparable long-term projects and I thought that this is OK default. It's stringy about sw. patent use, but I'm not in favor of them anyway. I suppose it should be "free", what does it prohibit you from doing and which ones do you suggest? I will look reconsider them.

[xplshn]

The license being used is copylefted, which isn't a great idea for a programming language given that programming languages are bound to be used by companies, etc, also, it makes using rye in repositories/projects licensed with freer licenses like *BSD, MIT, BSL

I'd recommend 3BSD, its free (meaning, its not copylefted), and it protects the author, its the same license that the entire Go tooling & std library uses

Currently, something that would be prohibited by this license is: Making a rye program, then making it a bundle of itself + the rye interpreter, and then distributing it, or using it in production without publishing the source code.

There's also The Unlicense, which I like a lot, it is the license used by popular software like yt-dlp, etc. Unlicense.org, it is recognized by all Git hosting, gitlab, github, codeberg, and it is offered as an option too when creating a repo.

• By free I meant licenses which can be read by anyone, not just lawyers, not only that, but also non-copylefted, so that anyone can use the code regardless of what license they use in their project

[refaktor]

Thanks for feedback on this. Frankly, I didn't know what "copylefted" means and that APL is copylefter. Based on your explanation yes, I don't want that.

Currently, something that would be prohibited by this license is: Making a rye program, then making it a bundle of itself + the rye interpreter, and then distributing it, or using it in production without publishing the source code.

Yeah, I certanly don't want to limit that.

I will check 3BSD and Unilicense. Thanks!