Awesome.
I wouldnāt expect you to manage the copy in the repository. Iām going with a model similar to Linux distros, where independent authors do their own thing and someone else pulls it all together into a curated collection.
Oh, the licensing thing can unfortunately be complicated. Most of that doesnāt really matter or apply unless it gets really popular though.
Copyrightable works default to all rights reserved. So, nobody can really do anything with it except personal stuff covered by fair use. Making it open requires at least a minimal license statement.
The opposite is public domain, when someone disclaims their copyright so that absolutely anyone can do anything with it. Although normally simple, this can be weirdly complicated in Europe.
The next simplest is a BSD-style license, which basically says anyone can do almost anything, as long as they preserve the copyright, license, and attribution. Thatās the bare minimum required for it to really count as a license. Some argue this makes it the most free of all licenses. In practice, however, BSD code tends to get eaten by companies like Microsoft and Apple, who keep taking what the community provides but never give anything back.
I usually go for a GPL-style license, which adds the additional requirement that people must share alike. I.e. anyone who distributes the work (or derivative works) in binary form must also provide the sources. It keeps people from taking without giving back ā they can use it, but they have to share their improvements. It also adds protections against a few abuses seen in the wild, such as Tivo-ization and patent trolling (see SCO vs IBM).
There are also quite a few others, each with their own quirks.
I know itās a thing people donāt generally want to deal with (and it can be done later), but people canāt really use or share it without something giving them permission to do so.