The first thing anyone should know about licensing is to ignore advices that says "use license X". The only exception is the advice to use known and established licenses.
Ask instead yourself under what conditions you would accept having your code used. Is it acceptable if a commercial company take the software, say Google or apple, using it in products and do major secret modifications and changes without contributing anything back? If no, AGPL is the license of choice.
If you are acceptable of that, do you want direct distributors of the software to contribute secret modifications? If no, use GPL.
Do you want companies to be able to take your code, distribute it and then try and take you out with patents? If no, use apache.
Else: MIT/BSD. For-profit companies prefer the lower end of the list because it gives them the most options in order to create revenue. As such, you might get more users if you can live with the consequences. In the end, only you can answer what you want the license to say.
Ask instead yourself under what conditions you would accept having your code used. Is it acceptable if a commercial company take the software, say Google or apple, using it in products and do major secret modifications and changes without contributing anything back? If no, AGPL is the license of choice.
If you are acceptable of that, do you want direct distributors of the software to contribute secret modifications? If no, use GPL.
Do you want companies to be able to take your code, distribute it and then try and take you out with patents? If no, use apache.
Else: MIT/BSD. For-profit companies prefer the lower end of the list because it gives them the most options in order to create revenue. As such, you might get more users if you can live with the consequences. In the end, only you can answer what you want the license to say.