When only one license is available, hide the license selection field

This is a good idea. A new patch is needed though and there might be some corner cases to consider.

My only concern here is disclosure to the user (especially for more permissive licenses). For example, if CC0 is the only license type available, it should be clear to a user that he or she is releasing the work into the public domain by publishing it. All CC0 and all standard CC licenses are non-revocable.

I suppose that's why I didn't consider the license "selection" to be redundant, even if there was no real choice (the choice would be: continue or not?).

If you want to eliminate the actual selection clicks, you can set that license as the default. Otherwise, with one license type available and no default site license, the seemingly useless step of selecting a license serves as a means of making it an active choice for a user (who also has the option to set the license type as his/her own default, to avoid selecting it each time).

Though, maybe that's awkward for some use cases? I guess the license selection element could be replaced by text, but we'd have to make it stand out from the preamble...

Suggestions?

I think the site operator should have the ultimate control over this. If the site has a "everything is CC0" policy, then the form field is unnecessarily cumbersome. Wikipedia doesn't make you pick a license when you make an edit.

I agree that when one license is available, we shouldn't remove the field by default. The site operator may not have set up made clear a site-wide policy or considered your points. But I think we should make it an option to omit the license selector form field, even when a license will be attached.

And in the case where there's only one license and the form field is displayed, I think it's safe to pre-select it to save the user a click.

I think knowing what the licensing terms of a site are when you post is important, but I tend to agree with turadg. Sites aren't required to indicate on post whether the node will be published publicly or will only be available to users in specific roles. I think the module should include an option that says something like...

Users agree to licensing terms elsewhere on the site. Do not include license description when posting when only one license option is enabled.

Yeah, makes sense, I agree. Site owner should have control. I'll make this change soon (unless someone else beats me to it).