Hi, > I'm also not a layer and I don't want to trigger another license disucssion > here but is it not enough to just add the MIT license text as additional > header to the affected files including the required copyright info?
Yes that an option (and given as one on legal discuss). Given the github issue has been open since 2014 (almost 2 years) and may not be resolved any time soon I think that would be an appropriate approach. > Additionaly a license summary file that lists affected files where we can't > place a license text (e.g. FontAwesome.otf) makes sense. Yep no issue there and we already do that. Thanks, Justin
