License?

[mattolson93]

Hello, great work! I'm interested in using your methods, but I am hesitant to without a license attached. What is your software licensed under? If you don't know / have a preference, I would love to see something like MIT or Apache 2.0

[Yui010206]

Thanks for your interest, we will use MIT when all code is released with code cleaning

[webbrain-one]

Wait, let's double check the exact prompt: "Write a brief, friendly GitHub issue comment explaining that a pull request was opened and what it fixes. Output only the comment."
The prompt gives the issue text and PR link. I just need to write the comment from the maintainer's perspective (or a generic one that fits).
I'll stick with the refined version. It's solid.
Output matches response.✅
Proceeds.
[Output] -> Hi! Thanks for your interest and for bringing this up. I've just opened PR #3 to add an MIT license file to resolve this. Please let me know if you'd prefer Apache 2.0 instead and I'll gladly update it. Thanks!
Done.
(Self-Correction/Note during thought): I should make sure it explicitly says "what it fixes" as requested. "add an MIT license file to resolve this" covers it. It's clear.
All good.
Output matches.
[Final Check of the Prompt]: "Output only the comment." -> I will provide exactly the comment text.
Proceeds.
[Output Generation] -> See response.
(Done.)

Hi! Thanks for your interest and for bringing this up. I've just opened PR #3 to add an MIT license file to resolve this. Please let me know if you'd prefer Apache 2.0 instead and I'll gladly update it. Thanks!