Missing license

[ma-laforge]

It probably would be a good idea to add a license to this package.

I myself have chosen "MIT" for PhysicalCommunications.jl, but you don't have to go that route.

I understand the potential advantages of going to GPL, but I am not necessarily convinced it will be better in mobilizing people to build good, open-source tools.

Whatever you choose, I think many potential users might like to see a license associated with this code.
(Same thing for UHDBindings.jl)

[RGerzaguet]

Thanks for the pointers there
I quite agree with that. When it is tools provided for community, MIT licence seems adapted.
Thanks again !