feat: add more license options

[msclock]

Add more options as below:

• Academic Free License v3.0
• Apache License 2.0
• Artistic License 2.0
• BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License
• BSD 3-Clause Clear License
• BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
• Boost Software License 1.0
• Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
• Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0
• Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
• Do What The F*ck You Want To Public License
• Educational Community License v2.0
• Eclipse Public License 1.0
• Eclipse Public License 2.0
• European Union Public License 1.1
• European Union Public License 1.2
• GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
• GNU General Public License v2.0
• GNU General Public License v3.0
• GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1
• GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0
• ISC License
• LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c
• MIT License
• Mozilla Public License 2.0
• Microsoft Public License
• Microsoft Reciprocal License
• University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source License
• SIL Open Font License 1.1
• Open Software License 3.0
• PostgreSQL License
• The Unlicense
• zlib License

[huxuan]

This is a great feature I want to support but did not. The key point is that I personally do not want to maintain the whole list especially for the license template for all possible options. Maybe we can integrate with something like https://choosealicense.com/? Actually, I did not investigate more on it. Let me know if you have any suggestions. :-)

[msclock]

This is a great feature I want to support but did not. The key point is that I personally do not want to maintain the whole list especially for the license template for all possible options. Maybe we can integrate with something like https://choosealicense.com/? Actually, I did not investigate more on it. Let me know if you have any suggestions. :-)

That's a real great option. Also, I know it first time that licenses are well-grouped on it.

[huxuan]

That's a real great option. Also, I know it first time that licenses are well-grouped on it.

GitHub also provide an API to Get A License. I would suggest to use this kind of services instead.

[msclock]

That's a real great option. Also, I know it first time that licenses are well-grouped on it.

GitHub also provide an API to Get A License. I would suggest to use this kind of services instead.

After reading it, it seems that a token is needed to use the API. But the token is not possible to expose to consumers by hard-coding. Maybe we need a secure token. 😒

[huxuan]

After reading it, it seems that a token is needed to use the API. But the token is not possible to expose to consumers by hard-coding.

Yep, it is true. I mean the API is just another possible option. If possible, I would prefer not to maintain all the license contents in the repo.

I will also do more investigation myself. Will come up again after some progress.

[msclock]

We can use jinja to render license template under the folder https://github.com/github/choosealicense.com/tree/gh-pages/_licenses @huxuan , see license file content meta on https://github.com/github/choosealicense.com/tree/gh-pages#license-metadata

[huxuan]

After some brief investigation, seems there is no well-maintained jinja template for open source licenses. Even for the choosealicense repo, it is a txt file and fields are not formatted in jinja variables. Maybe we have to maintain it ourselves. I will add more comments in the corresponding PR.