[ccan] ISC license?

[Tim Post]

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 15:25 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Hi Joey,
> 
>    Finally glanced at your AVL code; noted the ISC license.  I'm not
> particularly fussed, but I found this note:

Where I work, that license is described (more or less as) "Avoid unless
it would take months to implement the code in question otherwise, get
approval before using it".

This is for the same reason that is cited by the folks at GNU. We also
avoid other licenses that have similar wording, but these are mostly
written by people who (for whatever reason) aren't happy with existing
licenses and decide to write their own.

Rusty, it might actually be worth listing the licenses in the same table
that lists the modules, at least pending some anticipated love to the
ccan web site.

For instance, I might be working on something that is GPL2 only, which
means GPL2+ or LGPL2+ is just fine for me. However, we have some stuff
that is  GPL3, for instance. 

I know the licenses are listed on each individual module page, but
imagine 500 modules. It really helps to click stuff that looks
interesting when you know you can actually use it :)

Cheers!
--Tim