Do NOT require metadata license for new modules

[lizmat]

No description provided.

[raiph]

To elaborate on my thumbs up in case this PR is not supported by others, and for the record in case it is but we one day revisit this issue:

• I agree that we don't want anything unduly complex.

• If we (one day) do anything, it seems to me it would be best to make the zef ecosystem impose a license on its use which amounts to a (preferably more practical version of) https://github.com/Raku/ecosystem#legal.

This could be coordinated with tools like fez requiring a "Yes" from a user to a prompt that focuses on the minimum that's appropriate, perhaps something along the lines of:

You agree not to hold any parties liable for any damage or inconvenience caused by the operation, or failure of operation, of the zef ecosystem. You further agree that META files (META6.json or legacy META.info) found in any distribution you upload can be treated as covered by Artistic License 2.0 by any party, regardless of whatever general license you choose for your distribution.

[dontlaugh]

@raiph is this in the spirit of what you're suggesting? We (officially) say it's not required, but back off from whether or not (someday) it may be a requirement.

Suggested change

	Therefore this will **not** become a requirement. And thus https://github.com/Raku/problem-solving/issues/19 can be closed.
	Therefore we are declaring that a license is not required for modules. And thus https://github.com/Raku/problem-solving/issues/19 can be closed.