<feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'>
<title>mitmux/LICENSE, branch main</title>
<subtitle>Terminal-based intercepting HTTP proxy.
</subtitle>
<id>https://srdusr.com/git/mitmux/atom?h=main</id>
<link rel='self' href='https://srdusr.com/git/mitmux/atom?h=main'/>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://srdusr.com/git/mitmux/'/>
<updated>2026-06-05T20:27:00+00:00</updated>
<entry>
<title>Add GPL-3.0 license</title>
<updated>2026-06-05T20:27:00+00:00</updated>
<author>
<name>srdusr</name>
<email>99972264+srdusr@users.noreply.github.com</email>
</author>
<published>2026-06-05T20:27:00+00:00</published>
<link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='https://srdusr.com/git/mitmux/commit/?id=ec42c6652eec8030b3710a804d02ff954d253720'/>
<id>urn:sha1:ec42c6652eec8030b3710a804d02ff954d253720</id>
<content type='text'>
LICENSE is the exact, unmodified canonical text from gnu.org (fetched
directly, verified byte-identical via checksum before adding - a
license file is exactly the kind of text where reproducing it from
memory risks a subtle, avoidable error, so it wasn't worth the risk
when the authoritative source is one curl away). Per the GPL's own
guidance, the license document itself stays verbatim; the copyright
notice goes separately in README instead of scattered across every
source file's header, keeping this a one-place, low-noise addition
rather than a 30-file mechanical edit nobody asked for.

GPL-3.0 chosen deliberately for a security tool: it keeps derivatives
open (a vendor can't take community security tooling proprietary),
which is a common and well-regarded choice in that specific community.
Doesn't foreclose monetization either - as sole copyright holder,
dual-licensing the code commercially to others separately from the
public GPL release remains available, and the choice itself stays
changeable in the future for the same reason: relicensing only gets
hard once other people's copyrighted contributions are in the
codebase, which isn't the case here yet.
</content>
</entry>
</feed>
