[RRFC] move to MIT as default license for npm init, away from ISC

[bnb]

Motivation ("The Why")

MIT is - in my experience - the general intentional default in the JavaScript ecosystem. Additionally, Wikipedia notes that the ISC itself has recommended that the MIT license should be preferred over the ISC license, though the reference is currently broken.

How

Replace ISC with MIT in almost all instances here.

[ljharb]

Another alternative is to default to something restrictive like unlicensed, so that licensing is an explicit choice by the author.

[bnb]

If we were to not default to MIT and wanted to do something along those lines I'd prefer to just have it be an empty string. That is often (in my experience) closer to the actual intent in a situation where the default is published without being changed.

[ljharb]

I think it has to be valid SPDX, though.

[nlf]

what if npm init -y omitted the license field entirely, and npm init prompted the user to actually provide a license. if they just press enter with no value, we warn and prompt again, if they press enter with no value a second time then we omit the field entirely.

that, combined with a warning when you publish if the license field has been omitted could take us pretty far i think

[ljharb]

That sounds great!

[bnb]

huge +1 @nlf, assuming this also drops in a LICENSE file. this would also allow me to drop the license module from my init script.