chore: add Apache-2.0 LICENSE

[khaliqgant]

Adds an Apache-2.0 LICENSE file and sets "license": "Apache-2.0" in package.json.

This repo was public with no license file (legally "all rights reserved" by default), which both left it unprotected and discouraged adoption. Apache-2.0 makes the open intent explicit. The managed cloud control plane remains separate and closed.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[pullfrog]

no API key found — Pullfrog needs at least one LLM provider API key (e.g. ANTHROPIC_API_KEY, OPENAI_API_KEY, GEMINI_API_KEY) configured as a GitHub Actions secret.

Open repo secrets → · Configure model → · Setup docs → · Ask in Discord →

  ^{｜ Rerun failed job ➔ ｜ View workflow run ｜ via Pullfrog ｜ 𝕏}

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@khaliqgant, we couldn't start this review because you've reached your PR review rate limit.

More reviews will be available in 59 minutes and 54 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work.

Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans include higher PR review limits than trial, open-source, and free plans. In all cases, reviews become available again over time. During sustained high-volume PR review activity, CodeRabbit may temporarily slow when the next review becomes available.

Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 6bfd09cf-b6b6-4e1c-8cb3-dae3c8c8c586

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3128bec and 11579e5.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• LICENSE
• package.json

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch chore/apache-2.0-license

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request adds an Apache-2.0 license file and updates the root package.json to specify the license. The reviewer recommends also adding the license field to the package.json files of all public workspace packages to ensure correct identification by the npm registry and downstream consumers.

[gemini-code-assist]

While adding the license to the root package.json is correct, the individual workspace packages (such as packages/ai, packages/cli, packages/core, packages/migrate, packages/sdk/typescript, packages/server, and packages/types) are configured for public publishing but currently lack a "license" field in their respective package.json files. To ensure that the npm registry and downstream consumers correctly identify the license for each published package, please add "license": "Apache-2.0" to the package.json of all public packages in the workspaces.

[cubic-dev-ai]

1 issue found across 2 files

Prompt for AI agents (unresolved issues)

Check if these issues are valid — if so, understand the root cause of each and fix them. If appropriate, use sub-agents to investigate and fix each issue separately.


<file name="LICENSE">

<violation number="1" location="LICENSE:178">
P1: The README.md says the license is MIT, but the LICENSE file being added is Apache-2.0 (matching package.json which already specifies Apache-2.0). Update README.md to say 'Apache-2.0' instead of 'MIT' to avoid confusing contributors and adopters.</violation>
</file>

<sub>Reply with feedback, questions, or to request a fix.

Re-trigger cubic</sub>

[cubic-dev-ai]

P1: The README.md says the license is MIT, but the LICENSE file being added is Apache-2.0 (matching package.json which already specifies Apache-2.0). Update README.md to say 'Apache-2.0' instead of 'MIT' to avoid confusing contributors and adopters.

Prompt for AI agents

Check if this issue is valid — if so, understand the root cause and fix it. At LICENSE, line 178:

<comment>The README.md says the license is MIT, but the LICENSE file being added is Apache-2.0 (matching package.json which already specifies Apache-2.0). Update README.md to say 'Apache-2.0' instead of 'MIT' to avoid confusing contributors and adopters.</comment>

<file context>
@@ -0,0 +1,190 @@
+
+   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+
+   Copyright 2025 Agent Workforce Incorporated
+
+   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
</file context>