Add MIT LICENSE file

[deslawson]

The repository was missing a LICENSE file, making the code legally unlicensed and creating risk for contributors and adopters. Added an MIT license — the most common permissive open-source license — at the repository root. GitHub will now detect the license and display it in the repository sidebar, enabling safe contribution and adoption.

Summary

Added a standard MIT license file (LICENSE) at the repository root with the copyright line Copyright (c) 2026 XStreamRoll, resolving the unlicensed code issue.

Related issues

Closed #197

Closes:

Type of change

• feat
• fix
• docs
• chore
• test
• ci

Match the PR title to Conventional Commits: <type>(<scope>): <summary>.
docs: add MIT LICENSE file

Testing performed

Verify LICENSE file exists and is valid

ls -la LICENSE

Screenshots (if applicable)

Attach screenshots or animated GIFs for UI changes.

Checklist — author

• I rebased onto origin/main and resolved conflicts.
• I ran the quality gates locally: npm run lint, npm run build, npm test.
• Title follows Conventional Commits and references the issue (see above).
• I added/updated tests where applicable and they pass locally.
• No new TypeScript errors or lint warnings introduced.
• I updated documentation if the change affects public behavior.
• Screenshots included for UI changes.

Checklist — reviewer guidance

• Required checks: No lint/build/test gates apply — only a new LICENSE file (no code changed).
• CODEOWNER review: No package code touched; can be merged by any maintainer.
• Prefer small, focused PRs: This is a single-file, single-purpose PR — fits the guideline.

Follow the full PR process in CONTRIBUTING.md — particularly: sync with main, run quality gates, request a CODEOWNER review, and use squash-and-merge with a Conventional Commit-style squash message.

Closed #197

[Xhristin3]

Hey @deslawson \u2014 thanks for opening this! Unfortunately the diff in this PR doesn't match the title or issue #197. Instead of an MIT LICENSE file at the repo root, the changes here are the vouching feature (vouching.ts, vouch page, VouchImpactPreview, VouchRequestCard). Looks like the commits from that other work snuck into this branch. Could you rebase this back down to just the LICENSE file (MIT, with the 2026 XStreamRoll copyright line)? Happy to merge the moment it's only that change. \ud83d\ude4f

[deslawson]

It has been rectified

…

On Thu, 18 Jun 2026, 22:11 Xhr!st!n3, ***@***.***> wrote: *Xhristin3* left a comment (XStreamRollz/XStreamRoll#292) <#292 (comment)> Hey @deslawson <https://github.com/deslawson> \u2014 thanks for opening this! Unfortunately the diff in this PR doesn't match the title or issue #197 <#197>. Instead of an MIT LICENSE file at the repo root, the changes here are the vouching feature (vouching.ts, vouch page, VouchImpactPreview, VouchRequestCard). Looks like the commits from that other work snuck into this branch. Could you rebase this back down to just the LICENSE file (MIT, with the 2026 XStreamRoll copyright line)? Happy to merge the moment it's only that change. \ud83d\ude4f — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#292?email_source=notifications&email_token=CERGXUEGOSQJUO6FBVREFU35ARLG5A5CNFSNUABFM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQXTINZUGYYTMMZTGA3KM4TFMFZW63VHNVSW45DJN5XKKZLWMVXHJLDGN5XXIZLSL5RWY2LDNM#issuecomment-4746163306>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/CERGXUFLNOT52QCTSX2XP535ARLG5AVCNFSNUABGKJSXA33TNF2G64TZHMYTCMZUHA2TEMBVHE5US43TOVSTWNBWHEZDGNRWHE2DLILWAI> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>