Relicense under Apache-2.0 OR MIT.

[xStrom]

Resvg is being relicensed under the Apache-2.0 OR MIT dual license. For for more background on that see #838.

The practical steps to make that happen are as follows:

• Readme license section updates for the repository root and for all published packages.
• LICENSE-APACHE and LICENSE-MIT files in the repository root and in the root of all published packages.
• LICENSE-SUMMARY.txt file for the explorer-thumbnailer installer. The txt extension may be required.
• Cargo.toml license info sourced from a single virtual workspace Cargo.toml license field.
• Authors now tracked in the AUTHORS file and referenced as the Resvg Authors.
• A new CI check to verify formatting of Rust source files, and existence of copyright headers in Rust/C/C++ source files.
• New standard Linebender copyright headers in all Rust/C/C++ source files, including auto-generated ones.
• More packages properly defined as workspace members in the virtual workspace Cargo.toml.
• A few formatting changes done by cargo fmt.
• Unix style line endings in explorer-thumbnailer.
• Changelog entry to notify users of the license change.

[xStrom]

Can't have explorer-thumbnailer be part of the workspace immediately, as it contains Windows-only code. Will have to deal with it later, as the solution is too large to be part of this PR.

[DJMcNab]

cc @golsby - are part of our move to MIT/Apache 2.0, the NOTICE file would gain legal significance (due to the Apache 2.0 license), which wasn't desired. Because of this, we're removing that file.

(For context, see #697)

For cases where you require something to attribute, I'd suggest using both of the existing and new copyright notices:

Copyright (c) 2017 Yevhenii Reizner
Copyright (c) 2024 The Resvg authors

We can document this somewhere if you need that, although note that we cannot put that in a file named NOTICE or with a name containing NOTICE, due to the clause in the Apache 2.0 license.

[DJMcNab]

Looks very good. I'm not sure if we're completely read to merge this yet, but this seems right to me.

[DJMcNab]

In Xilem Core and Android Trace, I excluded this section from crate READMEs; a contribution is solely a repository level concern, so it isn't needed for clutter up the crate level README. Practically though, including it is also fine. Just providing this as food for thought

[xStrom]

We have like 5 different variations of this across our repos. It's on my list to get standardized and then we can get back to it for all repos.

For now, I'd leave it as-is and get back to it with the result of the more detailed discussion.

[DJMcNab]

Should we also exclude "codegen"?

[xStrom]

Yes, but that is automatic.

Regardless of whether exclude or include is specified, the following files are always excluded:

• Any sub-packages will be skipped (any subdirectory that contains a Cargo.toml file).

[DJMcNab]

Maybe? I don't mind leaving this as-is. Perhaps use and the Resvg authors instead?

[xStrom]

It's no different than all the other source files, which have been 99% written by Yevhenii Reizner. Even so, both here and elsewhere I went ahead with the more inclusive but concise standard of the Resvg Authors.

[sorairolake]

In conjunction with this change, I suggest making to make the project compatible with the REUSE Specification. REUSE was started by the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) to provide a set of recommendations to make licensing your Free Software projects easy, comprehensive, unambiguous, and machine-readable.

reuse can be used to help achieve and confirm this suggestion.