docs: restore the verbatim Apache-2.0 licence text - #27
Open
Andrei Kvapil (kvaps) wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
docs: restore the verbatim Apache-2.0 licence text#27Andrei Kvapil (kvaps) wants to merge 1 commit into
Andrei Kvapil (kvaps) wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
The LICENSE file was a modified copy of Apache-2.0 rather than the licence itself. The changes were not cosmetic: the definitions of "Work" and "Contribution" were narrowed, the section 4 redistribution and NOTICE obligations were rewritten (with one paragraph duplicated and a clause about "additional conditions conveying additional restrictions" that Apache-2.0 does not contain), and the warranty and liability sections were reworded. GitHub classified the result as "other", because it is not Apache-2.0 and not any other recognised licence. This replaces it with the verbatim text so the stated licence is the one that actually applies. Assisted-By: Claude Signed-off-by: Andrei Kvapil <kvapss@gmail.com>
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe LICENSE file updates Apache License wording for definitions, contributions, patent grants, redistribution, NOTICE requirements, liability clauses, and appendix guidance. ChangesLicense wording
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Andrei Kvapil (kvaps)
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 12, 2026 20:58
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does
The
LICENSEfile was a modified copy of Apache-2.0 rather than the licence itself. GitHub classifies it asNOASSERTION, and that is correct — it is not Apache-2.0 and not any other recognised licence.The changes are not cosmetic. Diffed against the canonical text, 151 lines differ, including the operative definitions:
This replaces the file with the verbatim Apache License 2.0 text, so the licence that is stated is the licence that applies. No relicensing is intended or implied — this restores the terms the project has always meant to be under.
Worth doing before the transfer to the
kilo-ioorganisation: a repository changing hands under licence text that is not the licence it claims is a much harder thing to unwind afterwards.Summary by CodeRabbit