Choose license

[ofgulban]

We need to choose a license for this repo. and mention it in readme too, I would vote for MIT. @PeerHerholz what do you say?

[PeerHerholz]

Hey @ofgulban,

thx for starting this topic.
Usually I would say: as open as possible, but as we're going to use data from others (e.g. the extracted ROIs from different publicly available atlases) I guess we have to adapt to that. Hence, checking their licenses and see from there.

That being said, does MIT also cover data, etc. ?

Furthermore it could be useful to have different license types for different parts of the repo:
the analyses scripts, ROI and tutorials are going to be included in the docker image. The stimulation scripts maybe, maybe not. For example thinking of FSL and it's license (info here). Kinda the same with FreeSurfer. As the docker image/toolbox will use both quite prominently we need to include those. I'll talk to some peeps with more experience in licenses, etc. and will post the answer here.

Would you be okay with that?

[ofgulban]

I am not sure whether MIT covers data. Probably it would be good to have a script to download the atlas data from their sources instead of including them directly. We might consider using duecredit at some point too.

it could be useful to have different license types for different parts of the repo

+1

I am ok with any decision, I think any license is better than having none.